Portuguese Ministers, 1851-1999: Social Background and Paths to Power

Disponível em: http://193.136.113.6/Opac/Pages/Search/Results.aspx?SearchText=UID=bb8aa8d5-c6b6-466a-81bb-fe8a67693cee&DataBase=10449_UNLFCSHThis paper provides an empirical analysis of the impact of regime changes in the composition and patterns of recruitment of the Portuguese ministerial elite throughout the last 150 years. The ‘out-of-type’, violent nature of most regime transformations accounts for the purges in and the extensive replacements of the political personnel, namely of the uppermost officeholders. In the case of Cabinet members, such discontinuities did not imply, however, radical changes in their social profile. Although there were some significant variations, a series of salient characteristics have persisted over time. The typical Portuguese minister is a male in his midforties, of middle-class origin and predominantly urban-born, highly educated and with a state servant background. The two main occupational contingents have been university professors - except for the First Republic (1910-26) - and the military, the latter having only recently been eclipsed with the consolidation of contemporary democracy. As regards career pathways, the most striking feature is the secular trend for the declining role of parliamentary experience, which the democratic regime did not clearly reverse. In this period, a technocratic background rather than political experience has been indeed the privileged credential for a significant proportion of minister

What’s in a “research passport”? A collaborative autoethnography of institutional approvals in public involvement in research

© 2016 Laterza et al. Background In the growing literature on public involvement in research (PIR), very few works analyse PIR organizational and institutional dimensions in depth. We explore the complex interactions of PIR with institutions and bureaucratic procedures, with a focus on the process of securing institutional permissions for members of the public (we refer to them as “research partners”) and academics involved in health research. Methods We employ a collaborative autoethnographic approach to describe the process of validating “research passports” required by UK NHS trusts, and the individual experiences of the authors who went through this journey– research partners and academics involved in a qualitative study of PIR across eight health sciences projects in England and Wales. Results Our findings show that research partners encountered many challenges, as the overall bureaucratic procedures and the emotional work required to deal with them proved burdensome. The effects were felt by the academics too who had to manage the whole process at an early stage of team building in the project. Our thematic discussion focuses on two additional themes: the emerging tensions around professionalisation of research partners, and the reflexive effects on PIR processes. Conclusions In the concluding section, we make a number of practical recommendations. Project teams should allow enough time to go through all the hurdles and steps required for institutional permissions, and should plan in advance for the right amount of time and capacity needed from project leaders and administrators. Our findings are a reminder that the bureaucratic and organisational structures involved in PIR can sometimes produce unanticipated and unwanted negative effects on research partners, hence affecting the overall quality and effectiveness of PIR. Our final recommendation to policy makers is to focus their efforts on making PIR bureaucracy more inclusive and ultimately more democratic

Bureaucratic Power: Security and the National Response Plan

The National Response Plan was created by the Department of Homeland Security for the purpose of organizing disaster relief services by coordinating activities of cabinet departments and independent agencies. A case study of the Plan\u27s creation shows that the Department has skillfully used its sources of administrative power to build a latent control network with little or no oversight, raising questions of accountability and ultimate security. Variables discussed here promote building of a theory of bureaucratic power