The turn of the 21st century saw two important pieces of legislation introduced in Brazil: the Law of Fiscal Responsibility or LFR (2000) and the City Statute (2001). While each law has been celebrated, this article argues that a perversion of their intentions is emerging in practice. The scale and scope of municipal budget composition and allocations in the period studied (1995–2010) give reason to question how these landmark laws are being locally interpreted. Evidence details a disproportionate rise in current expenditures in all state capitals in Brazil since the introduction of the LFR. Further, among state capitals with the largest number of ‘sub-normal agglomerations’, a few key cities show a peculiarly stagnant proportion of expenditures directed towards housing and urbanisation. A case study of São Paulo is presented to explore explanations for these trends and understand what they mean for the direction and control over upgrading investments in that city.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AfonsoJ. R. (2004) The relations between different levels of government in Brazil, CEPAL Review, 84, pp. 133–155.
2.
AfonsoJ. R.AraújuE. A. (2004) Local government organization and finance: Brasil. Preliminary version of paper prepared for ShahA. (Ed.) Local Governance in Development Countries (2006). Washington, DC: The World Bank.
3.
AfonsoJ. R.JunqueiraG. (2009) Investimento público no Brasil é mais municipal que federal, Revista de Administração Municipal, 55(272), pp. 18–25.
4.
AghónG.AlburquerqueF.CortésP. (2001) Desarrollo económico local y descentralización en América Latina: un análisis comparativo. CEPAL/GTZ, Santiago de Chile.
5.
AmaralA. (2002) Habitação na cidade de São Paulo, 2nd edn.São Paulo: POLIS.
AvritzerL. (2009) Participatory Institutions in Democratic Brazil. Washington, DC: Wood-row Wilson Center Press.
8.
BaoicchiG. (2003a) Radicals in power, in: BaiocchiG. (Ed.) Radicals in Power: The Workers’ Party (PT) and Experiments in Urban Democracy in Brazil, pp. 1–26. London: Zed Books.
9.
BaoicchiG. (2003b) Participation, activism, and politics: the Porto Alegre experiment, in: FungA.Olin WrightE. (Eds) Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovation in Empowered Participatory Governance, pp. 45–76. London: Verso.
10.
BragonR. (2001) Prefeitos preparam pressão contra LFR in Agência Folha em Belo Horizonte, Folha de São Paulo, 5February.
11.
Bresser PereiraL. C. (1999) From bureaucratic to managerial public administration in Brazil, in: Bresser PereiraL. C.SpinkP. (Eds) Reforming the State: Managerial Public Administration in Latin America, pp. 115–146. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
12.
BuddsJ.TeixeiraP. and SEHAB (2005) Ensuring the right to the city: pro-poor housing, urban development and tenure legalization in São Paulo, Brazil, Environment and Urbanization, 17(1), pp. 89–114.
13.
CabannesY. (2004) Participatory budgeting: a significant contribution to participatory democracy, Environment and Urbanization, 16(1), pp. 27–46.
14.
Cities Alliance and SEHAB (2009) Social housing in São Paulo:challenges and new management tools. The Cities AllianceWashington, DC.
15.
CorbachoA.SchwartzG. (2007) Fiscal responsibility laws, in: KumarM.Ter-MinassianT. (Eds) Promoting Fiscal Discipline, pp. 58–105. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
16.
CredendioJ. E. (2006) Governo não tem data para reforma das marginais, Reportagem Local, Folha de São Paulo, 5September.
CymbalistaR.MoreiraT. (2002) O Conselho Municipal de Habitação em São Paulo. São Paulo: Instituto Pólis/PUC-SP.
19.
FernandesE. (2002) Providing security of land tenure for the urban poor: the Brazilian experience, in: Durand-LasserveA.RoystonL. (Eds) Holding Their Ground: Secure Land Tenure for the Urban Poor in Developing Countries, pp. 101–126. London: Earthscan.
20.
FernandesE. (2007) Implementing the urban reform agenda in Brazil, Environment and Urbanization, 19(1), pp. 177–189.
21.
FixM. (2003) A ‘fórmula mágica’ da parceria publico-privada: operações urbanas em São Paulo, in: SchicchiM. C.BenfattiD. (Eds) Urbanismo: dossiê São Paulo—Rio de Janeiro, pp. 185-198. Campinas: PUC-CAMPINAS/PROURB-UFRJ.
22.
Folha de São Paulo (2004) Marta cola em Lula e admite disputer em 2006, Entrevista, Folha de São Paulo, 25December2004.
23.
Folha de São Paulo (2006) Lembo diz que faz cortes para deixar Estado ‘redondinho’Reportagem Local, 24October.
24.
Folha de São Paulo (2007) Lula admite afrouxar LRF para os Estados, Reportagem Local, 16May.
25.
FreireS. (2004) Prefeituras cortam às pressas para se enquadrar em lei fiscal, Política Municipal, Folha de São Paulo, 29November.
26.
Freire SantoroP.CymbalistaR.TeixeiraA. C.TatagibaL. (2007) Habitação: Controle Social e Política Pública. Caderno 31, Série Observatório dos direitos do cidadão, Instituto Pólis, São Paulo.
27.
GeddesB. (1993) The Politicians’ Dilemma: Reforming the State in Latin America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
28.
KowarickL.BondukiN. (1994) Urban space and political space: from populism to redemocratization, in: KowarickL. (Ed.) Social Struggles and the City: The Case of São Paulo, pp. 60–76. New York: Monthly Review Press.
29.
KumarM.Ter-MinassianT. (2007) Fiscal discipline: key issues and overview, in: KumarM.Ter-MinassianT. (Eds) Promoting Fiscal Discipline, pp. 1–8. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
30.
MarquesE. C.BichirR. M. (2003) Public policies, political cleavages and urban space: state infrastructure policies in São Paulo, Brazil, 1975–2000, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(4), pp. 811–827.
31.
PMSP (Prefeitura do Município de São Paulo) (1995–2010) Demonstrativos de Despesa por Orgão e Categoria Economica. Orçamento Annual, Secretaria das Financas, Departamento da Contadoria.
32.
PochmannM. (2005) Millennium goals and the risk of noncompliance: the limits of sub-national governments for full human settlement in Brazil. Paper presented at the workshop on Achieving the Millennium Goals: Mobilization of Resources for Human Settlements in the Cities of the Middle Income Countries, Rockefeller Foundation, New York, September.
33.
PoubeldeCastroD.GarciaL. M. (2004) Contabilidade Pública no Governo Federal. São Paulo: Editora Atlas.
34.
PremchandA. (1995) Effective Government Accounting, Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
35.
RossettoR. (2003) Fundo Municipal de Habitação. Caderno 14, Série Observatório dos direitos do cidadão, Instituto Pólis/PUC-SP, São Paulo.
36.
SandroniP. H. (2011) Recent experience with land value capture in São Paulo, Brazil, Land Lines, July, pp. 14–19.
37.
SauleN.Jr (2002) The right to housing and the prevention of forced evictions in Brazil in: Durand-LasserveA.RoystonL. (Eds) Holding Their Ground: Secure Land Tenure for the Urban Poor in Developing Countries, pp. 138–150. London: Earthscan.
38.
Serafim AbrantesJ. (2001) Resistir é preciso, Folha de São Paulo, 9April.
39.
SimionatoM. (2001) LRF impede investimentos na area social em Jundiaí, Folha de São Paulo, 1July.
40.
SmolkaM.FurtadoF. (1996) Argumentos para a Rehabilitiação do IPTU e do ITBI como Instrumentos de Intervenção Urbana (Progressista), Espaco e Debates, 30(16), pp. 87–103.
41.
SmolkaM.FurtadoF. (2001) Lessons from the Latin American experience with value capture, Land Lines, 13(4).
42.
TendlerJ. (1997) Good Government in the Tropics. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
43.
ValençaM. (1992) The inevitable crisis of the Brazilian housing finance system, Urban Studies, 29(1), pp. 39–56.
44.
VetterD. M.VetterM. (2011) Could land-based financing help create fiscal space for investment by Brazil’s municipalities?Working paper, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA.
45.
World Bank (2006) Brazil: Inputs for a Strategy for Cities: A Contribution with a Focus on Cities and Municipalities, Vol. 1. Washington, DC: World Bank.
