This article argues that Brazil’s success in responding to the AIDS epidemic rested in the government’s pursuit of a reversal of decentralization, which entailed the government’s delegation of policy-making autonomy, funding, and discretionary fiscal transfers to the national AIDS program. AIDS bureaucrats achieved this by establishing close partnerships with social health movements and AIDS nongovernmental organizations advocating policy ideas with a historically proven track record of success while resembling similar social health movements in the past. This partnership, in turn, provided AIDS bureaucrats with the legitimacy and influenced needed for policy reform.
AraujoO. (1939). As tendencias modernas no luta contra as doenças venéreas [The modern tendencies in the fight against venereal diseases]. Jornal de Sífilis e Urologia, 111.
2.
ArnquistS.EllnerA.WeintraubR. (2011). HIV/AIDS in Brazil. Harvard Business School. Cambridge, MA: The President and Fellow of Harvard College.
3.
BastosC. (1999). Global responses to AIDS, science and technology. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.
4.
BatesR.GreifA.LeviM.RosenthalJ.WeingastB. (1998). Analytical narratives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
BélandD. (2007a). Ideas and institutional change in social security: Conversion, layering, and policy drift. Social Science Quarterly, 88, 20-38.
6.
BélandD. (2007b). Neo-liberalism and social policy: The politics of ownership. Policy Studies, 28, 91-107.
7.
BermanS. (2001). Ideas, norms, and culture in political analysis. Comparative Politics, 33, 231-240.
8.
BlytheM. (2001). The transformation of the Swedish model: Economic ideas, distributional conflict and institutional change. World Politics, 54, 1-26.
9.
Brazil, Ministry of Health. (2010). National AIDS Program. Brasil: Secretary of Vigilance in Health.
10.
Brazil, National AIDS Program. (2007). Plano integrado de enfrentamento da feminização da epidemia da Aids [The integrated plan for confronting the feminization of the AIDS epidemic]. Brasília, Brazil: Ministry of Health.
11.
CampbellJ. (1998). Institutional analysis and the role of ideas in political economy. Theory and Society, 27, 377-409.
12.
CarraraS. (1996). O Tributo a vênus: a luta anti-venérea no Brasil no fins do século XIX até os anos 40 [A tribute to Venus: The anti-venereal fight in Brazil at the end of the 19th century until the years of the 40s]. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Casa Oswaldo Cruz.
13.
CiconelloA. (2008). Social participation as a democracy-consolidating process in Brazil. In GreenD. (Ed.), From poverty to power: How active citizens and effective states can change the world (pp. 207-217). Boston, MA: Oxfam International.
14.
CrespoM.SpinkJ. (2003). A comissão nacional de Aids: a presença do passado na construção do futuro [The national AIDS commission: The presence of the past in the construction of the future]. Brasília, Brazil: Ministry of Health.
15.
DobbinF. (1993). The social construction of the great depression: Industrial policy during the 1930s in the United States, Britain, and France. Theory and Society, 22, 1-56.
16.
Do NascimentoD. (2005). As pestes do século XX: tuberculose e Aids no Brasil, uma história comparada [The pests of the 20th century: Tuberculosis and AIDS in Brazil, a comparative history]. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Editora FIOCRUZ.
17.
EcksteinH. (1975). Case studies and theory in political science. In GreensteinF.PolsbyN. (Eds.), Handbook of political science (pp. 118-120). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
18.
FernandesR. (1931). Sífilis, uma doença social [Syphilis, a social disease]. Jornal de Sífilis e Urologia, 22.
19.
FilhoC. (2001). História social da tuberculose e do tuberculoso [A social history of tuberculosis and those with tuberculosis]. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Editora FIOCRUZ.
20.
GalvãoJ. (2000). AIDS no Brasil: a agenda de construção de uma epidemia [AIDS in Brazil: The agenda for constructing an epidemic]. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: ABIA.
21.
GoldsteinJ. (1993). Ideas, interests, and American trade policy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
22.
GoldsteinJ.KeohaneR. (Eds.). (1993). Ideas & foreign policy: Beliefs, institutions, and political change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
23.
GómezE. (2011). How Brazil outpaced the United States when it came to AIDS. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 36, 317-352.
24.
GómezE. (2012a). Overcoming decentralization’s defects: Discovering alternative routes to centralization in a context of path dependent health policy devolution. Global Health Governance, 5, 1-35.
25.
GómezE. (2012b). Testing in inter-dependent analytical approach to social science theory: Explaining the evolution of social movements, NGOs, and government response to HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis in Brazil. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 38, 123-159.
26.
GrecoD.SimãoM. (2007). Brazilian policy on universal access to AIDS treatment. AIDS, 21, S37-S45.
27.
HallP. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policy-making in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25, 275-296.
28.
HijjarM.GerhardtG.TeixeiraG.ProcópioM. (2007). Retrospecto do controle da Tuberculose no Brasil [Retrospective of controlling tuberculosis in Brazil]. Revista Saúde Pública, 41, 50-58.
29.
HochmanG. (1998). A Era do saneamento: As bases da política de saúde pública no Brasil [The era of sanitation: The bases of public health policy in Brazil]. São Paulo. Brazil: Editora Hucitec/Anpocs.
30.
Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. (1999). UNAIDS and nongovernmental organizations. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
31.
Le LoupG.Andreia de AssisA.Costa-CoutoM.ThoenigJ.FleuryS.CamargoK.JrLarouzeB. (2009). A public policy approach to local models of HIV/AIDS control in Brazil. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 1108-1115.
32.
LeviC.VitoriaM. (2002). Fighting against AIDS: The Brazilian experience. AIDS, 16, 2373-2383.
33.
LiebermanE. (2009). Boundaries of contagion: How ethnic politics have shaped government responses to AIDS. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
34.
ManorJ. (1999). Political economy of democratic decentralization. Washington, DC: World Bank Group Press.
35.
MarchJ.OlsenJ. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York, NY: Free Press.
36.
Massard da FonsecaE.NunnA.Souza-JuniorP.BastosF.Mendes RibeiroJ. (2007). Descentralização, AIDS e redução de danos: A implementação de políticas públicas no Rio de Janeiro, Brasil [Decentralization, AIDS, and the reduction of damage: The implementation of public policies in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil]. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 23, 2134-2144.
37.
MattosR.TertoV.ParkerR. (2003). World Bank strategies and the response to AIDS in Brazil. Divulgação em Saúde para Debate, 27, 215-227.
38.
MeinersC.Sagaon-TessierL.HasencleverL.MoattiJ. (2011). Modeling HIV/AIDS drug price determinants in Brazil: Is generic competition a myth?PLoS ONE, 6, 1-16.
NascimentoD. (1991). Tuberculose: De questão pública à questão de estado [Tuberculosis: From a public to a state question] (Masters thesis). Institute of Social Medicine, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
41.
NeustadtR.MayE. (1986). Thinking in time: The uses of history for decision-makers. New York, NY: Free Press.
42.
NunnA. (2009). The politics and history of AIDS treatment in Brazil. New York, NY: Springer.
43.
NunnA.Massard da FonsecaE.BastosF.GruskinS. (2009). AIDS treatment in Brazil: Impacts and challenges. Health Affairs, 28, 1103-1113.
44.
Oliveira-CruzV.KowalskiJ.McPakeB. (2004). The Brazilian HIV/AIDS success story—Can others do it?Tropical Medicine & International Health, 9, 292-297.
45.
PaivaV.PupoL.BarbozaR. (2006). The right to prevention and the challenges of reducing vulnerability to HIV in Brazil. Revista de Saúde Pública, 40, S1-S10.
46.
ParkerR. (2003). Building the foundations for the response to HIV/AIDS in Brazil. Divulgação em Saúde para Debate, 27, 143-183.
47.
PascheD.RighiL.ThomeH.StolzE. (2006). Paradoxos das políticas de descentralização de saúde no Brasil [The paradoxes of health policy decentralization in Brazil]. Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública, 20, 416-422.
48.
PiresD. (2006). Alguns apontamentos sobre o processo de descentralização do programa de AIDS [Some notes about the decentralization program for AIDS] (Masters thesis). Institute de Medicina Social de Univesidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
49.
PortzJ. (1996). Problem definitions and policy agendas: Shaping the educational agenda in Boston. Policy Studies Journal, 24, 371-386.
50.
Prud’hommeR. (1995). The dangers of decentralization. World Bank Observer, 10, 201-220.
51.
RichJ.GómezE. (2012). Centralizing decentralized governance in Brazil. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 42, 1-26.
52.
SikkinkK. (1991). Ideas and institutions: Developmentalism in Brazil and Argentina. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
53.
SridharD.GómezE. (2011). Health financing in Brazil, Russia, and India: What role does the international community play?Health Policy & Planning, 26, 12-24.
54.
TeixeiraP. (1997). Políticas públicas em Aids. In ParkerR. (Ed.), Políticas, instituições e Aids: Enfrentando a epidemia no Brasil (pp. 43-68). Rio de Janiero, Brasil: ABIA.
55.
TeixeiraP. (2003). Universal access to AIDS medicines: The Brazilian experience. Divulgação em Saúde para Debate, 27, 184-191.
56.
VieiraF.ReisA. (1930). A educação sexual como medida de proteção à infância [Sex education as a measure of child protection]. Jornal de Sífilis e Urologia, 25.
57.
VillelaW. (1999). Das interfaces entre os níveis governamentais e a sociedade civil [Interfaces between levels of government and civil society]. In ParkerR. (Ed.), Saúde, desenvolviemento e política: respostas frente à Aids no Brasil [Health, development, and policy: Responses to the AIDS epidemic in Brazil] (pp. 177-224). São Paulo, Brazil: ABIA.
58.
WeylandK. (1995). Social movements and the state: The politics of health reform in Brazil. World Development, 23, 1699-1712.
59.
WillisE.GarmanC.HaggardS. (1999). The politics of decentralization in Latin America. Latin American Research Review, 34, 7-56.
60.
ZahariadisN. (2007). The multiple streams framework: Structure, limitations, prospects. In SabatierP. (Ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, CO: Westview.
