Cooperação e competição entre políticas no Brasil: os cursos da governabilidade no presidencialismo da catalização

Public policies have been studied in the various fields of humanities and social sciences, from different theoretical and technical aspects. However, there is still a lack of studies that incorporate the dimension that encompasses the political action and its interference in such actions, also recognizing the importance of the institutional setting of the Brazilian presidential model in implementing these policies. This fragmented and multiparty system has led to power heterogeneous sets of political parties. Thus, the ministerial offices, more than assisting the President´s government project, manage particularized agendas, which are party biased and have the influence of interest groups in hegemonic themes addressed by government agencies. When these agendas operate in sectoral and specialized policies, the friction level is apparently low. However, when this occurs in intersectoral actions, such as in regional development, there is evidence of strong signs of competition among government agencies, which in theory, should operate in an integrated manner. Although this is not a specific feature of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva´s government- the period to be studied- there was similar behavior in Fernando Henrique Cardoso´s presidency, one realizes that the expansion of coalition on behalf of governance is increasingly interfering in the outcome of intersectoral public policies, due to these multiple arguments in action. In order to understand these processes, this study focused on the Sustainable and Integrated Development Programme for Differentiated Meso-Regions (PROMESO), part of the National Policy for Regional Development (NPRD). The program provides interface with various government agencies and their public policies in a clear intersectoral design. The research sought to identify and analyze the relationships between government agencies and their programs with interest groups, whether political parties or other segments of civil society, highlighting the logic of favoritism, which poses in second place the integration of actions in the intersectoral policies. Therefore, besides the theoretical debate that incorporates several categories of political science, public administration, public policy, geography and economics, the study focused on secondary sources, using different government agencies databases in order to raise information. It was observed that the interference of partisan politics has been disastrous for some public policies. Thus, the research confirms that cooperative character is fragile within government agencies, often limited to official documents, and that there is indeed, a striking feature of competition, especially when it comes to transversalized policies

Cooperação e competição entre políticas no Brasil: os custos da governabilidade no presidencialismo de coalizão

Public policies have been studied in the various fields of humanities and social sciences, from different theoretical and technical aspects. However, there is still a lack of studies that incorporate the dimension that encompasses the political action and its interference in such actions, also recognizing the importance of the institutional setting of the Brazilian presidential model in implementing these policies. This fragmented and multiparty system has led to power heterogeneous sets of political parties. Thus, the ministerial offices, more than assisting the President´s government project, manage particularized agendas, which are party biased and have the influence of interest groups in hegemonic themes addressed by government agencies. When these agendas operate in sectoral and specialized policies, the friction level is apparently low. However, when this occurs in intersectoral actions, such as in regional development, there is evidence of strong signs of competition among government agencies, which in theory, should operate in an integrated manner. Although this is not a specific feature of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva´s government- the period to be studied- there was similar behavior in Fernando Henrique Cardoso´s presidency, one realizes that the expansion of coalition on behalf of governance is increasingly interfering in the outcome of intersectoral public policies, due to these multiple arguments in action. In order to understand these processes, this study focused on the Sustainable and Integrated Development Programme for Differentiated Meso-Regions (PROMESO), part of the National Policy for Regional Development (NPRD). The program provides interface with various government agencies and their public policies in a clear intersectoral design. The research sought to identify and analyze the relationships between government agencies and their programs with interest groups, whether political parties or other segments of civil society, highlighting the logic of favoritism, which poses in second place the integration of actions in the intersectoral policies. Therefore, besides the theoretical debate that incorporates several categories of political science, public administration, public policy, geography and economics, the study focused on secondary sources, using different government agencies databases in order to raise information. It was observed that the interference of partisan politics has been disastrous for some public policies. Thus, the research confirms that cooperative character is fragile within government agencies, often limited to official documents, and that there is indeed, a striking feature of competition, especially when it comes to transversalized policies

Cooperação e competição entre políticas no Brasil: os custos da governabilidade no presidencialismo de coalizão

Public policies have been studied in the various fields of humanities and social sciences, from different theoretical and technical aspects. However, there is still a lack of studies that incorporate the dimension that encompasses the political action and its interference in such actions, also recognizing the importance of the institutional setting of the Brazilian presidential model in implementing these policies. This fragmented and multiparty system has led to power heterogeneous sets of political parties. Thus, the ministerial offices, more than assisting the President´s government project, manage particularized agendas, which are party biased and have the influence of interest groups in hegemonic themes addressed by government agencies. When these agendas operate in sectoral and specialized policies, the friction level is apparently low. However, when this occurs in intersectoral actions, such as in regional development, there is evidence of strong signs of competition among government agencies, which in theory, should operate in an integrated manner. Although this is not a specific feature of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva´s government- the period to be studied- there was similar behavior in Fernando Henrique Cardoso´s presidency, one realizes that the expansion of coalition on behalf of governance is increasingly interfering in the outcome of intersectoral public policies, due to these multiple arguments in action. In order to understand these processes, this study focused on the Sustainable and Integrated Development Programme for Differentiated Meso-Regions (PROMESO), part of the National Policy for Regional Development (NPRD). The program provides interface with various government agencies and their public policies in a clear intersectoral design. The research sought to identify and analyze the relationships between government agencies and their programs with interest groups, whether political parties or other segments of civil society, highlighting the logic of favoritism, which poses in second place the integration of actions in the intersectoral policies. Therefore, besides the theoretical debate that incorporates several categories of political science, public administration, public policy, geography and economics, the study focused on secondary sources, using different government agencies databases in order to raise information. It was observed that the interference of partisan politics has been disastrous for some public policies. Thus, the research confirms that cooperative character is fragile within government agencies, often limited to official documents, and that there is indeed, a striking feature of competition, especially when it comes to transversalized policies

A Coalitional Game Framework for Cooperative Secondary Spectrum Access

We consider a framework in which several service providers offer downlink wireless data access service in a certain area. Each provider serves its end-users through opportunistic secondary spectrum access of licensed spectrum, and needs to pay primary license holders of the spectrum usage based and membership based charges for such secondary spectrum access. In these circumstances, if providers pool their resources and allow end-users to be served by any of the cooperating providers, the total user satisfaction as well as the aggregate revenue earned by providers may increase. We use coalitional game theory to investigate such cooperation among providers, and show that the optimal cooperation schemes can be obtained as solutions of convex optimizations. We next show that under usage based charging scheme, if all providers cooperate, there always exists an operating point that maximizes the aggregate revenue of providers, while presenting each provider a share of the revenue such that no subset of providers has an incentive to leave the coalition. Furthermore, such an operating point can be computed in polynomial time. Finally, we show that when the charging scheme involves membership based charges, the above result holds in important special cases.

Provider-Customer Coalitional Games

Efficacy of commercial wireless networks can be substantially enhanced through large-scale cooperation among involved entities such as providers and customers. The success of such cooperation is contingent upon the design of judicious resource allocation strategies that ensure that the individuals' payoffs are commensurate to the resources they offer to the coalition. The resource allocation strategies depend on which entities are decision-makers and whether and how they share their aggregate payoffs. Initially, we consider the scenario where the providers are the only decision-makers and they do not share their payoffs. We formulate the resource allocation problem as a nontransferable payoff coalitional game and show that there exists a cooperation strategy that leaves no incentive for any subset of providers to split from the grand coalition, i.e., the core of the game is nonempty. To compute this cooperation strategy and the corresponding payoffs, we subsequently relate this game and its core to an exchange market setting and its equilibrium, which can be computed by several efficient algorithms. Next, we investigate cooperation when customers are also decision-makers and decide which provider to subscribe to based on whether there is cooperation. We formulate a coalitional game in this setting and show that it has a nonempty core. Finally, we extend the formulations and results to the cases where the payoffs are vectors and can be shared selectively.

Kernelization complexity of possible winner and coalitional manipulation problems in voting

In the POSSIBLE WINNER problem in computational social choice theory, we are given a set of partial preferences and the question is whether a distinguished candidate could be made winner by extending the partial preferences to linear preferences. Previous work has provided, for many common voting rules, fixed parameter tractable algorithms for the POSSIBLE WINNER problem, with number of candidates as the parameter. However, the corresponding kernelization question is still open and in fact, has been mentioned as a key research challenge 10]. In this paper, we settle this open question for many common voting rules. We show that the POSSIBLE WINNER problem for maximin, Copeland, Bucklin, ranked pairs, and a class of scoring rules that includes the Borda voting rule does not admit a polynomial kernel with the number of candidates as the parameter. We show however that the COALITIONAL MANIPULATION problem which is an important special case of the POSSIBLE WINNER problem does admit a polynomial kernel for maximin, Copeland, ranked pairs, and a class of scoring rules that includes the Borda voting rule, when the number of manipulators is polynomial in the number of candidates. A significant conclusion of our work is that the POSSIBLE WINNER problem is harder than the COALITIONAL MANIPULATION problem since the COALITIONAL MANIPULATION problem admits a polynomial kernel whereas the POSSIBLE WINNER problem does not admit a polynomial kernel. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

On monotonic core allocations for coalitional games whith veto players

We characterize a monotonic core concept defined on the class of veto balanced games. We also discuss what restricted versions of monotonicity are possible when selecting core allocations. We introduce a family of monotonic core concepts for veto balanced games and we show that, in general, the nucleolus per capita is not monotonic.

Egalitarian distributions in coalitional models: The Lorenz criterion

The paper presents a framework where the most important single-valued solutions in the literature of TU games are jointly analyzed. The paper also suggests that similar frameworks may be useful for other coalitional models.

Coalitional games with veto players: Myopic and farsighted behavior

This paper studies an allocation procedure for coalitional games with veto players. The procedure is similar to the one presented by Dagan et al. (1997) for bankruptcy problems. According to it, a player, the proposer, makes a proposal that the remaining players must accept or reject, and con ict is solved bilaterally between the rejector and the proposer. We allow the proposer to make sequential proposals over several periods. If responders are myopic maximizers (i.e. consider each period in isolation), the only equilibrium outcome is the serial rule of Arin and Feltkamp (2012) regardless of the order of moves. If all players are farsighted, the serial rule still arises as the unique subgame perfect equilibrium outcome if the order of moves is such that stronger players respond to the proposal after weaker ones.

Simple Coalitional Strategy Profiles in Repeated Games

This paper is a version of the discussion paper titled "Simple coalitional strategy profiles"

Coalitional Games and Contracts Based on Individual Deviations

We study what coalitions form and how the members of each coalition split the coalition value in coalitional games in which only individual deviations are allowed. In this context we employ three stability notions: individual, contractual, and compensational stability. These notions differ in terms of the underlying contractual assumptions. We characterize the coalitional games in which individually stable outcomes exist by means of the top-partition property. Furthermore, we show that any coalition structure of maximum social worth is both contractually and compensationally stable.

The 2015 Portuguese Legislative Election: Widening the Coalitional Space and Bringing the Extreme Left in

This article provides an overview of the Portuguese legislative election held on 4 October 2015 by exploring the economic and political context in which the election took place, the opinion polls, party positions and campaign issues, the results and, finally, the process that led to the formation of the first Socialist minority government supported by far-left parties. Due to this outcome, despite the relative majority of the votes obtained by the incumbent centre-right coalition, we argue that this election result cannot be interpreted as a victory of austerity, but rather as the first step towards contract parliamentarism in Portugal.

Congressional acquiescence to presidentialism in the US ‘War on Terror’

Congressional dominance theory holds that not only can the US Congress control the executive, it does. The terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on 11 September 2001 and the Bush administration's ensuing global 'war on terror' suggest a different result. Bush's response to 9/11 signalled not only new directions in US foreign and domestic policy but a new stage in the aggrandisement of presidential power in the United States and a further step in the marginalisation of the Congress. Informed by a constitutional doctrine unknown to the framers of the US Constitution, the Bush administration pursued a presidentialist or 'ultra-separationist' governing strategy that was disrespectful to the legislature's intended role in the separated system. Using its unilateral powers, in public and in secret, claiming 'inherent' authority from the Constitution, and exploiting the public's fear of a further terrorist attack and of endangering the lives of US troops abroad, the administration skilfully drove its legislation through the Congress. Occasionally, the Congress was able to extract concessions - notably in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, when partisan control of the government was split - but more typically, for most of the period, the Congress acquiesced to administration demands, albeit with the consolation of minor concessions. The administration not only dominated the lawmaking process, it also cowed legislators into legitimating often highly controversial (and sometimes illegal) administration-determined definitions of counter-terrorism and national security policy. Certainly, the Congress undertook a considerable amount of oversight during the period of the 'war on terror'; lawmakers also complained. But the effects on policy were marginal. This finding held true for periods of Democratic as well as Republican majorities.