Decentralization makes it possible to develop public initiatives that are not available to states and the Union.
*By Marcelo Nery
In election years, in the months leading up to the elections until they are held, the dissemination of any information that could be interpreted as institutional advertising is prohibited. Therefore, it is not allowed to mention names or expressions, for example, that could identify authorities, governments or administrations whose positions are in dispute, that is, practically everyone. Furthermore, it is necessary to adopt measures to adjust the content of websites, channels and other media that can be considered as institutional advertising, thus covering the majority of social data.
Before this period begins and, whether due to legal requirement or convenience, some issues do not receive due attention or appear in an attenuated form, it is crucial to provoke a frank dialogue about municipal policies.
In the United States and England, local authority responsibility for public policy is common, where most of these policies are municipal or intra-municipal. The interest of Latin American countries in the performance of different levels of political power is not only the result of observing the American and English experiences, but also of the process of decentralization of government practices in European countries.
Decentralization makes it possible to develop public initiatives that are not available to the states and the Union. This occurs mainly due to the presence of specific services in cities and neighborhoods, in addition to the proximity to local communities and associations. This proximity facilitates the development of plans adapted to the local reality, sensitive to the population's expectations, and promotes the establishment of partnerships between government agencies and civil society organizations. Often, municipal policies incorporate resources from state and federal governments, or represent the implementation, at the municipal level, of these governments' policies.
In Brazil, each city faces a set of specific challenges. However, local governments also share similar challenges, including ineffectiveness in adapting management strategies, scarcity of resources and the tendency to prioritize partisan political interests over the needs of the population, especially groups with less social capital. Therefore, we found that at least two mayors elected in 2020 have lost their mandates, every month, due to reasons such as administrative improbity or abuse of economic and political power.
Given this context, there is a broad debate surrounding the advantages and disadvantages of focused management strategies. Opponents of these strategies highlight that they have a limited scope and often, due to ineffective management, result in the migration of social problems to other geographic areas, displacement to other social groups or a change in the nature of these problems. Proponents of targeting argue that, given insufficient resources, concentrating on specific areas or groups is the best option, with greater chances of achieving the intended results.
In fact, fair municipal policies can promote the quality of life of citizens in specific locations, and can target social groups in areas that do not have access to essential services. Focusing on problems has the advantage of facilitating the identification and integration of strategic agents, as well as the resolution of conflicts. However, a smart city should not follow a single model, and choosing the best strategy depends on a diagnosis.
Diagnosis is a process that involves identifying a problem or set of priority challenges. It involves the identification of the affected areas, their physical, economic, social, cultural and political-administrative characteristics, as well as the analysis of the spatio-temporal dynamics of social manifestations, such as collective actions and violence, and the risk and protective factors that influence the increase or decrease in the severity of municipal crises. Furthermore, it requires the assessment of the consequences resulting from public interventions already carried out. However, diagnosis is only the starting point, leading to the formulation and implementation stages, each of which includes a series of steps.
The formulation of municipal policies is based on a process of negotiations and agreements. During formulation, the formation of minimum consensus is essential. These consensuses are not static and can increase or decrease at any time. Furthermore, the formulation depends on qualified demands. Unclear and precise demands, as well as conflicting or contradictory demands, need to be qualified during the definition of principles and guidelines and before implementing strategies.
Implementation is led by public managers and public sector professionals. Although the leadership of the mayor's office is essential, the practice is influenced by the attitudes of community leaders, groups and social movements. These leaders have the power to mobilize. Mobilization is a priority, as it can guide the actions of public agents and enable the continuity of programs and actions during government change processes. Finally, effective implementation requires adequate training of all involved, aligned with the results of the diagnosis and policy objectives.
In addition to the steps mentioned, monitoring and evaluation are vital for the success of municipal policies. The use of methods and techniques for data collection and analysis and the creation of indicators for monitoring, control and support for decision-making stand out. Here, technology and innovation, which play crucial roles at each stage, assume a critical role, providing government authorities and citizens with essential tools to inform choices and promote the sustainable development of cities.
It is essential to highlight that the success of a smart city lies in not instrumentalizing these choices for partisan political objectives, but rather in solving the problems identified in the diagnoses. Councils, forums, conferences and public hearings, both in person and digitally, are ways to demystify such problems and motivate and organize popular participation.
More than popular participation, citizen participation plays a fundamental role in guiding municipal policies, highlighting the value of transparency, respect for laws and human rights, and consideration for society's expectations. In general terms, this approach is also reflected in the mobilization of resources and the application of concrete mechanisms for the legal and ethical accountability of government activities.
At this moment, we have a new opportunity to strengthen our citizenship. We must pay attention to the meaning of the arguments, as it is crucial that the electoral speech does not portray an unrealistic or utopian scenario. On the contrary, it must demonstrate an understanding of the challenges faced, the necessary steps and engagement, and propose practical and viable approaches to management strategies that seek to ensure equitable access to public services. However, in many Brazilian cities, this has not been the predominant tone in the speeches that have been and will be given.
*Marcelo Batista Nery is a researcher at think tank from ABES and the Oscar Sala Chair at the Institute of Advanced Studies at USP (IEA-USP), coordinator of Technology Transfer and Head of the PAHO/WHO Collaborating Center (BRA-61) at the Center for Violence Studies at the University of São Paulo .
Notice: The opinion presented in this article is the responsibility of its author and not of ABES - Brazilian Association of Software Companies
EN 
PT 
