ABSTRACT
The first chapter laid out two constructs of theoretical interest to the research project, one of them being business-state relations. The aim was to follow the evolution of business-state relations in Brazil with a focus on analysing business political influence. The introduction also noted the six faces of business and their relevance to generating policy impacts. Specifically, it argued that business political influence depended on political weight and political activity of business in addition to state capacity to implement policy decisions. Political weight related to the economic faces of business (i.e. as capital, sector and firm), whereas political activity typically derived from the political faces of business (i.e. as association, network and change agent). Bearing the above in mind, the main aim of this chapter is to explore the theoretical implications of the issues raised by the business lobby for port reform. Specifically: why was AEI successful? How did AEI initially impact policy and subsequently changes in institutions, rules and norms of behaviour? What are the resources and strengths as well as deficiencies and weaknesses of business lobbying in Brazil? Was port reform a unique situation? More generally, both theoretically and practically: what are the feasible alternatives to corporatism for structuring business-state relations in Brazil? A closer look at these questions effectively highlights the relevance of the two themes that were analysed in this volume. It also suggests the significance of a third. The two main themes focus on the importance of, first, business organisation and collective action and, second, features of institutional change. With respect to the first theme, this chapter seeks to explain the impact of business organisation on policy formulation and implementation, especially how a ‘political entrepreneur’ can overcome collective action problems and the legacies of corporatism to create business consensus around reform. With respect to the second theme, the next chapter explores the institutional dimensions of reform and modernisation processes in Brazil, including the nature of institutional change in the current democratic period, and the potential pathways for the evolution of corporatism. The third theme, the potential for developing policy communities in Brazil, is examined in both chapters of Part III. Here, policy network analysis (PNA) is applied to the Brazilian situation. In some ways, it draws
together the other two themes – organisational capacity and institutional change – to explore the implications of my empirical observations for the theoretical insights of this research project. After some brief introductory comments, the first section of this chapter examines business organisation and collective action. Next, it addresses the legacies of corporatism and the prospects for applying PNA to Brazil. Finally, it comments on the evolution of business-state relations in the country in the past twenty-five years. Part II has already discussed how the conflict-ridden capital-labour situation in ports as well as weak state capacity and faltering political will had a direct impact on the port reform process. This chapter applies the insights from studying that process to explain the evolution of business lobbying and the challenges of institutional modernisation in Brazil. Before considering the legacies of corporatism and the opportunities for business policy influence via collective action, it is worth clarifying what is meant by success in this context. Success is not simply getting one’s way. Success requires that state actors and interest groups are sufficiently flexible to restructure their strategies and actions as opportunities present themselves. Success also requires a balance of technical rationality, flexibility, and the ability to persuade others to take a different view of the issue at hand, or at least to adjust/lengthen their time horizons. Successful actors are adaptable and open to opportunities that develop over time. Thus, an effective business organisation is not only adaptive, but can also persuade others, especially state actors, to adjust their preferences and behaviour. The adaptive strategy and capacity of business can even turn a seemingly negative policy pronouncement into an economic advantage.1 The dynamic of shifting strategies and priorities is inherent to any reform process, and therefore, a key to understanding business-state relations in times of reform.
