State transformations and welfare models: the significance of the return of public institutions in Ecuador of the Citizen Revolution (2007–2017)

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the relation between estate transformations produced during the governments of the Citizen Revolution (CR) in Ecuador (2007-2017) and welfare regime transformations.Design/methodology/approachThe CR’s project registers an array of specificities that make it a relevant case study to understand it. Among them, it articulated the transformation of the development model with a comprehensive state reform: emphasized both the modernization of the state and the productive structure, and the creation of the basic pillars of a welfare state. The ambitious project materialized in an ambivalent manner, revealing accomplishments and limitations.FindingsThe recovery of resources for the state, the efficient organization of resources, decentralization and deconcentration processes, public administration transformations and policy de-corporatization processes accompanied and even propelled important achievements in the social sphere in terms of decommodification, stratification, commodification and defamiliarization. Ecuador’s starting point, as a small and impoverished country with pubic and communal goods and services dismantled through neoliberal reforms, was quite precarious. But, progress was made. Beyond the identified limitations, its accomplishments must be highlighted because they are novel in comparison to other progressive government experiences, especially in the context of Central Andean countries.Originality/valueThis article vindicates the need to link state transformation processes to welfare regime transformations, as well as the academic literature that informs both fields. The description of what took place in Ecuador in the field of social welfare during the ten years of the CR continues to confirm the theoretical potential of the concept of welfare regime with the necessary translations and appropriations that allow for the analysis of countries in the region. It enables an approach to a more theoretically and methodologically elusive object that is at the same time tremendously potent in analytical terms and in its contributions to social transformations. An object that alludes to areas gravely affected during neoliberal hegemony, linked to public institutionality, state capacity and state autonomy. This is why everything that affects the state and the management of public goods and services must be incorporated into the analysis.

Guest editorial: Old and New Challenges for Welfare Regimes – A Global Perspective

“…She points out that axiological, partisan and electoral ambiguities have been at the basis of the formation of consensuses for the development of CCT programs, conditioned their features and limited their scope in these two countries. In turn, Ubasart-González and Minteguiaga (2021) delve into the links between state and welfare regime transformation processes witnessed by Ecuador during the governments of the so-called Citizens' Revolution (2007–2017). They argue for the need for comprehensive analysis of social welfare provision, which considers the different dimensions that affect the state capacity to manage public goods and services.…”

“…cash transfers, care, youth, taxation, education, health and others). The studies examine responses and challenges of social policy systems in Mozambique, Uganda, Ghana, Zambia and South Africa (Gasior et al , 2021), Brazil and Mexico (Tomazini, 2021), Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Croatia, Slovenia and Bulgaria (Broka and Toots, 2021), Ecuador (Ubasart-González and Minteguiaga, 2021), India (Nakray, 2021), Japan (Milly, 2021), Austria (Landini, 2021), Mexico (Martínez-Martínez et al , 2021), Greece (Burgi and Kyramargiou, 2021) and 15 post-Soviet states [1] (Panaro, 2021). Most papers refer to emerging welfare states, and some discuss social policies in more consolidated social policy systems, such as the cases of Austria, Greece and Japan, which are currently facing challenges that involve citizens from emerging welfare states.…”

Política pública para la población adulta mayor e impacto de la Pensión Asistencial del Programa «Bono de Desarrollo Humano» en Ecuador

“…A pesar del reconocido papel que ha asumido el Estado ecuatoriano en la implementación de políticas sociales en las últimas dos décadas (Ubasart & Minteguiaga, 2021), hay serias debilidades institucionales y deficiencia en la provisión de servicios. El sistema político ecuatoriano, procesador de las demandas de la Población Adulta Mayor (PAM) ha generado a modo de outputs un conjunto de servicios, programas, instrumentos jurídicos y otros bienes, pero la persistencia de la situación de pobreza estructural y la vulnerabilidad de ese colectivo generan incógnitas sobre los resultados de las acciones del Estado.…”

“…Bajo ese tipo de planteamientos, la última década del siglo XX marca lo que ha sido reconocido como el regreso del Estado y sus instituciones en América Latina, luego de un periodo en el que éste había cedido muchas de sus atribuciones al mercado, especialmente en el ámbito de gestión económica y social del territorio, bajo la fuerte influencia del pensamiento neoliberal (Ubasart & Minteguiaga, 2021). No obstante, en el marco de grandes desigualdades intensificadas bajo ese modelo económico, los últimos años de la década de 1990 se caracterizan por la inserción paulatina y sostenida de políticas sociales que se mantienen hasta la actualidad.…”

“…La segunda mitad de la década del 2000 y los siguientes años se caracterizan por una recuperación y fortalecimiento de lo público estatal e inversión social, a diferencia de las décadas precedentes (Minteguiaga, 2012;Ubasart & Minteguiaga, 2021), lo que además significó una mayor expansión del tejido institucional del Estado a lo largo del territorio.…”