Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro / O propósito da tese é analisar em que circunstâncias presidentes brasileiros recorrem a mecanismos de controle político sobre a burocracia pública. O argumento central é que o recurso presidencial a nomeações políticas, decretos regulamentares detalhados e criação de órgãos públicos centralizados na Presidência deverá variar em função de fatores políticos e características das coalizões de governo. Por meio de nomeações políticas, presidentes podem monitorar o comportamento de servidores públicos sob a influência indesejada de ministros do gabinete. Com decretos regulamentares detalhados podem reduzir a autonomia decisória de servidores públicos na interpretação de leis vagas. Por fim, por meio da criação de órgãos públicos centralizados na Presidência, podem gerar condições mais favoráveis ao futuro controle da burocracia pública. O propósito da tese será desdobrado em três problemas de pesquisa, com desenhos orientados para variáveis. O primeiro, desenvolvido no primeiro capítulo, aborda como a heterogeneidade política da coalizão afeta o controle presidencial sobre a burocracia pública por meio de nomeações políticas. O segundo problema, discutido no capítulo seguinte, analisa como a rotatividade ministerial e a demanda pela implementação interministerial de uma mesma lei afetam o grau de detalhamento de decretos regulamentares. Por fim, o terceiro problema de pesquisa, abordado no último capítulo, avalia como a composição heterogênea dos gabinetes afeta a criação de burocracias centralizadas na Presidência da República. Por meio de métodos estatísticos, foram estimados modelos de regressão linear multivariada a fim de analisar os determinantes 1. das nomeações políticas e 2. do grau de detalhamento dos decretos regulamentares, bem como modelos de regressão logística binária para avaliar a probabilidade de centralização presidencial na criação de órgãos públicos. A politização da burocracia federal tende a aumentar quando o conflito entre parceiros da coalizão é maior, uma alternativa presidencial às orientações ministeriais indesejadas sobre a burocracia pública. Decretos regulamentares tendem a ser mais detalhados quando ministérios são mais voláteis e quando há implementação interministerial, uma alternativa presidencial à autonomia da burocracia pública. Por fim, a centralização tende a crescer quando o conflito de políticas entre presidente e ministros é maior, uma saída às orientações ministeriais nocivas às preferências do presidente. / This dissertation analyzes when Brazilian presidents seek to control the public bureaucracy. It argues that political appointments, detailed decrees regulating laws, and the political centralization should be a function of cabinet characteristics. Through political appointments, on one hand, presidents can monitor the public servants behavior. On other hand, they can keep the ministers behavior in tabs. Through detailed decrees, presidents can limit the bureaucratic discretion to interpret vague laws and, through political centralization, presidents can generate the best conditions to the future political control on the bureaucracy. The dissertation has three variable oriented research problems. Firstly, it analyzes the relationship between the cabinet political heterogeneity and political appointments. Secondly, it evaluates the effects of cabinet turnover and the multiple principal problem on the detailed decrees. Thirdly, it analyzes the relationship between the cabinet political heterogeneity and the probability of political centralization. Using statistical methods, were estimated multivariate linear regression models to find the determinants of political appointments and detailed decrees. Also, through binary logit models were analyzed the determinants of the probability of political centralization. There is a tendency to an increase of the politicization when the policy conflict between coalition partners grows. Presidential decrees have been detailed when the cabinet turnover and the multiple principal problem grown. Finally, the political centralization grows when the policy conflict between president and ministries is greater.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-17T13:51:34Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 JoaoMRN_DISSERT.pdf: 3197339 bytes, checksum: 8679305ed89e4c7f00dd0dbd6382c8b9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-07-18 / Public policies have been studied in the various fields of humanities and social sciences, from different theoretical and technical aspects. However, there is still a lack of studies that incorporate the dimension that encompasses the political action and its interference in such actions, also recognizing the importance of the institutional setting of the Brazilian presidential model in implementing these policies. This fragmented and multiparty system has led to power heterogeneous sets of political parties. Thus, the ministerial offices, more than assisting the President?s government project, manage particularized agendas, which are party biased and have the influence of interest groups in hegemonic themes addressed by government agencies. When these agendas operate in sectoral and specialized policies, the friction level is apparently low. However, when this occurs in intersectoral actions, such as in regional development, there is evidence of strong signs of competition among government agencies, which in theory, should operate in an integrated manner. Although this is not a specific feature of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva?s government- the period to be studied- there was similar behavior in Fernando Henrique Cardoso?s presidency, one realizes that the expansion of coalition on behalf of governance is increasingly interfering in the outcome of intersectoral public policies, due to these multiple arguments in action. In order to understand these processes, this study focused on the Sustainable and Integrated Development Programme for Differentiated Meso-Regions (PROMESO), part of the National Policy for Regional Development (NPRD). The program provides interface with various government agencies and their public policies in a clear intersectoral design. The research sought to identify and analyze the relationships between government agencies and their programs with interest groups, whether political parties or other segments of civil society, highlighting the logic of favoritism, which poses in second place the integration of actions in the intersectoral policies. Therefore, besides the theoretical debate that incorporates several categories of political science, public administration, public policy, geography and economics, the study focused on secondary sources, using different government agencies databases in order to raise information. It was observed that the interference of partisan politics has been disastrous for some public policies. Thus, the research confirms that cooperative character is fragile within government agencies, often limited to official documents, and that there is indeed, a striking feature of competition, especially when it comes to transversalized policies / As pol?ticas p?blicas t?m sido estudadas em diversas ?reas das ci?ncias humanas e sociais, a partir de diferentes aspectos te?ricos e t?cnicos. No entanto, ainda h? car?ncia de estudos que incorporem a dimens?o do exerc?cio da pol?tica e suas interfer?ncias em tais a??es, reconhecendo inclusive a import?ncia da arquitetura institucional do modelo presidencialista brasileiro na implementa??o dessas pol?ticas. Esse sistema multipartid?rio e fragmentado tem levado ao poder conjuntos heterog?neos de partidos pol?ticos. Dessa forma, os gabinetes ministeriais, mais do que auxiliarem o projeto de governo do presidente da Rep?blica, passam a operar agendas particularizadas, que possuem marcas partid?rias e influ?ncia de grupos de interesse hegem?nicos nos temas tratados pelas ag?ncias governamentais. Quando estas agendas operam em pol?ticas setoriais e especializadas, o n?vel de atrito aparentemente ? baixo. Por?m, quando isto ocorre em a??es intersetoriais, a exemplo do desenvolvimento regional, evidenciam-se fortes tra?os de competi??o entre ag?ncias governamentais, que em tese deveriam operar de forma integrada. Embora este n?o seja um tra?o especifico do governo de Luiz In?cio Lula da Silva o per?odo que ser? estudado , encontrando-se comportamentos similares na presid?ncia de Fernando Henrique Cardoso, percebe-se que a amplia??o da coaliz?o em nome da governabilidade vem interferindo cada vez mais no resultado das pol?ticas p?blicas intersetoriais, em virtude destas m?ltiplas l?gicas que se manifestam. Para se entender estes processos, elegeu-se como foco do estudo o Programa de Desenvolvimento Integrado e Sustent?vel de Mesorregi?es Diferenciadas (PROMESO), parte da Pol?tica Nacional de Desenvolvimento Regional (PNDR). O programa estabelece interfaces com diversas ag?ncias governamentais e suas pol?ticas p?blicas em um claro desenho intersetorial. A pesquisa buscou identificar e analisar as rela??es das ag?ncias governamentais e seus programas com grupos de interesse, fossem eles partidos pol?ticos ou outros segmentos da sociedade civil, evidenciando as l?gicas de favorecimento, que secundarizam a integra??o de a??es nas pol?ticas intersetoriais. Para tanto, al?m do debate te?rico que incorpora categorias diversas da ci?ncia pol?tica, da administra??o p?blica, das pol?ticas p?blicas, da geografia e da economia, o estudo debru?ou-se sobre fontes secund?rias, utilizando bases de dados das diferentes ag?ncias governamentais, com a finalidade de levantar informa??es. Evidenciou-se que a interfer?ncia da pol?tica partid?ria tem sido um aspecto nefasto para algumas pol?ticas p?blicas. Assim, a pesquisa confirma que ? t?nue o car?ter cooperativo no ?mbito das ag?ncias governamentais, muitas vezes limitado aos documentos oficiais, e que de fato h? um tra?o marcante de competi??o, sobretudo quando se fala em pol?ticas transversalizadas

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro / O propósito da tese é analisar em que circunstâncias presidentes brasileiros recorrem a mecanismos de controle político sobre a burocracia pública. O argumento central é que o recurso presidencial a nomeações políticas, decretos regulamentares detalhados e criação de órgãos públicos centralizados na Presidência deverá variar em função de fatores políticos e características das coalizões de governo. Por meio de nomeações políticas, presidentes podem monitorar o comportamento de servidores públicos sob a influência indesejada de ministros do gabinete. Com decretos regulamentares detalhados podem reduzir a autonomia decisória de servidores públicos na interpretação de leis vagas. Por fim, por meio da criação de órgãos públicos centralizados na Presidência, podem gerar condições mais favoráveis ao futuro controle da burocracia pública. O propósito da tese será desdobrado em três problemas de pesquisa, com desenhos orientados para variáveis. O primeiro, desenvolvido no primeiro capítulo, aborda como a heterogeneidade política da coalizão afeta o controle presidencial sobre a burocracia pública por meio de nomeações políticas. O segundo problema, discutido no capítulo seguinte, analisa como a rotatividade ministerial e a demanda pela implementação interministerial de uma mesma lei afetam o grau de detalhamento de decretos regulamentares. Por fim, o terceiro problema de pesquisa, abordado no último capítulo, avalia como a composição heterogênea dos gabinetes afeta a criação de burocracias centralizadas na Presidência da República. Por meio de métodos estatísticos, foram estimados modelos de regressão linear multivariada a fim de analisar os determinantes 1. das nomeações políticas e 2. do grau de detalhamento dos decretos regulamentares, bem como modelos de regressão logística binária para avaliar a probabilidade de centralização presidencial na criação de órgãos públicos. A politização da burocracia federal tende a aumentar quando o conflito entre parceiros da coalizão é maior, uma alternativa presidencial às orientações ministeriais indesejadas sobre a burocracia pública. Decretos regulamentares tendem a ser mais detalhados quando ministérios são mais voláteis e quando há implementação interministerial, uma alternativa presidencial à autonomia da burocracia pública. Por fim, a centralização tende a crescer quando o conflito de políticas entre presidente e ministros é maior, uma saída às orientações ministeriais nocivas às preferências do presidente. / This dissertation analyzes when Brazilian presidents seek to control the public bureaucracy. It argues that political appointments, detailed decrees regulating laws, and the political centralization should be a function of cabinet characteristics. Through political appointments, on one hand, presidents can monitor the public servants behavior. On other hand, they can keep the ministers behavior in tabs. Through detailed decrees, presidents can limit the bureaucratic discretion to interpret vague laws and, through political centralization, presidents can generate the best conditions to the future political control on the bureaucracy. The dissertation has three variable oriented research problems. Firstly, it analyzes the relationship between the cabinet political heterogeneity and political appointments. Secondly, it evaluates the effects of cabinet turnover and the multiple principal problem on the detailed decrees. Thirdly, it analyzes the relationship between the cabinet political heterogeneity and the probability of political centralization. Using statistical methods, were estimated multivariate linear regression models to find the determinants of political appointments and detailed decrees. Also, through binary logit models were analyzed the determinants of the probability of political centralization. There is a tendency to an increase of the politicization when the policy conflict between coalition partners grows. Presidential decrees have been detailed when the cabinet turnover and the multiple principal problem grown. Finally, the political centralization grows when the policy conflict between president and ministries is greater.

The subject of this thesis is the presidential system as one of the distinguished alternatives of existing political systems in the present democratic society. This thesis is divided into three parts. The primary aim of the first part is to produce a brief overview of individual political systems and to outline their mutual differences through the description of their characteristics. The second part describes a specific political system in this world - namely the United States of America which became the source of inspiration for all subsequently established systems of this type. This part focusing on the United States is then divided into three separate chapters where each of them provides a view of particular branches of the government which form a constitutional system of the state together. These chapters offer not only the characteristics of these particular government branches and their central government bodies, but they also explain their mutual relationship and the control mechanism and particularly their relation to the President who is the key character of the entire presidential system, also his office and his powers. The main source of information, from which this part of the thesis proceeds, is the United States Constitution itself which is, as the supreme law of the state, the...

監察制度（control system）是民主體制中重要的監督機制，主要的功能是監督行政和保障人權，隨著第三波民主化的發展，從一九八０年代開始，監察使制度（ombudsman system）快速擴散至全世界，形成一股「監察風潮」（Ombudsmania）。在民主國家中，我國與芬蘭都是實施監察制度較悠久的國家，僅次於瑞典。無獨有偶，兩國都在一九九０年至二０００年進行一連串的憲政改革，修憲後我國政府體制從修正式的內閣制（Parliamentarism）轉變為半總統制（Semi-Presidentialism），而芬蘭則從典型的半總統制傾向議會內閣制。同時在憲政改革的過程中，兩國的監察制度也都有許多的變革。 本文是從權力分立原則（Doctrine of Separation of Powers）、有限政府（Limited Government）和第四權（The Fourth Branch of Power）概念等監察理論作為法理基礎，並以法制研究途徑（Legal-Institutional Approach）和新制度主義（New Institutionalism）作為分析架構，從靜態的法制層面和動態的運作層面，探討我國的監察制度和芬蘭的國會監察使制度，以及兩國在二０００年憲政改革之後的運作情況，以瞭解兩國制度之特色及優劣，並且針對中、芬兩國基本國情、監察制度的基本差異、制度與制度變遷、實務運作與案件、實施成效等幾個面向來作分析比較，剖析其間之異同及其原因。 再者，本文也根據國際性比較與芬蘭國會監察使制度之優點和成功經驗，歸納出監察制度實施成功之條件，包括：（一）監察使「權威」（authority）的建立。（二）具備獨立性、中立性和專業性的特性。（三）健全的國家廉政體系。（四）國會的支持與配合。（五）政治人物對監察使和監察制度的尊重。（六）監察使與外界建立良好的互動關係。並進一步評估我國現行監察制度之問題，主要有下列幾項：（一）形式獨立但實質獨立性不足。（二）監察院的權威未建立。（三）部分監委人選不適任。（四）監察院的功能有待提升。（五）缺乏行銷以及與外界互動不足。 最後，筆者針對以上缺失，分別從監察院的定位、組織規模、監委選任、特殊監察使的設立、監察院的職權、監察院的預算、人權保障、與外界互動、對監委的監督等幾個面向，提出具體改革之建議。 / The control system is an important mechanism in democracy to supervise administration and to protect human rights. Since 1980, with the development of the third wave democratization, the ombudsman system rapidly disseminate to all parts of world, forming the phenomenon of “Ombudsmania”. Among the democratic countries, the control system has been carried out for long in both ROC and Finland, only shorter than Sweden Coincidently, both countries underwent a series of constitutional reform during 1990 to 2000. Thereafter, ROC transformed from the revised Parliamentarism to the Semi-Presidentialism, while Finland turned from the classical Semi-Presidentialism to the parliamentarism. The control systems of both countries have also changed a lot during the constitutional reform. Based on the control theories including concepts of Doctrine of Separation of Powers, Limited Government, and The Fourth Branch of Power as the legal basis, this article utilized the Legal-Institutional Approach and the analysis constructs of New Institutionalism to explore the ROC’s control system and parliamentary ombudsman system of Finland, as well as their operation after the post-constitutional reform in 2000, from the static legislative level and the dynamic operational level. This provided understanding of the characteristics and evaluations of the systems in both countries. Moreover, we focused on the aspects of the essential differences in cultures and in the control systems, the evolution of the systems, the functioning, the cases, and their outcomes to analyze the reasons for the differences between the two systems. Furthermore, based on the international comparison and the success experience in parliamentary ombudsman of Finland, the conditions required for successful practice of the control system was involved: (1) establishment of the authority of the ombudsman, (2) the independent, neutral, and professional characteristics, (3) The national integrity system, (4) the support and cooperation of the parliament, (5) The respect of the politicians to the ombudsman and to the control system, and (6) The well-established interaction between the ombudsman and the outside. Further evaluation found the major problems in the present control system in ROC, including (1) lack of the substantial independence, (2) not established authority, (3) the incapability of some Control Yuan members, (4) the necessity to improve the functions of the Control Yuan, (5) the deficiency of marketing and of interaction with the outside. Finally, for the weakness mentioned above, I proposed the concrete recommendation for reformation, from the aspects of the position of the Control Yuan, the dimension of the organization, the election of the committee members, the establishment of specific Ombudsman, the powers and the budgets for the Control Yuan, the protection of human rights, the interactions with the outside, and the administrations of the committee members.

This dissertation attempts to explain why cross-national variation exists in government approaches to dealing with illegal drugs. As other scholars have shown, several domestic and international political factors do account for some of this variance. However less is known of the effect that bureaucratic dominance and political institutions may have on drug policy. This research argues that bureaucrats define problems in ways that make their services the best possible solution to policymakers. Mediating the ability of bureaucrats to influence drug policy outcomes are political institutions. Certain institutional structures foster a competitive policymaking environment while others foster a more cooperative policymaking environment. In the former of these, law enforcement approaches to the drug problem are often retained as the status quo because competition between policy actors prevents consideration of alternatives. In the latter environment however, prevention, treatment, and harm reduction approaches to the drug problem are developed because cooperation between policymakers allows other actors. namely public health bureaucrats.to influence drug policy decision making. To test this argument, I constructed an original dataset that includes over 4,000 observations of drug policy in 101 democracies. Institutional data on intergovernmental relations, regime type, political bargaining, electoral design, and cameralism were regressed on 6 different drug policy indices: law enforcement, deterrence-based prevention, abstinence-based treatment, educationbased prevention, substitution-based treatment, and harm reduction. While controlling for government resource capacity, severity of the drug problem, international pressure, and political ideology, I found that institutions explain a portion of the variance in drug policy outcomes. Providing in-depth information about these phenomena is a large amount of field data I collected while interviewing 155 politicians, bureaucrats, interest group leaders, and service providers. Respondents from all four of the case countries examined in this research.including United States, Canada, Austria, and Netherlands.report that bureaucrats play a major role in the formation of drug policy. Which bureaucrats have the most influence on policymakers is largely a function of domestic political conditions, international political factors, and political institutions.