Modelos de avaliação de desempenho de atividades parlamentares no Brasiluma análise crítica

Resumo

This dissertation describes and analyzes the five main Brazilian political rankings, developed by institutions and specialists who monitor and assess the performance of the National Congress and its members. The “Heads of Congress”, from the Inter-union Department of Parliamentary Advice (DIAP), which maps the 100 most influential congressmen of the National Congress; the “Congress Elite”, edited by political consulting firm Arko Advice; the “Best Parliamentarians”, from the Congresso em Foco; the “Ranking of Politicians”, which evaluates the best and worst deputies and senators; and the 5D Ranking, prepared by the Atlas Politico portal, which ranks the most active parliamentarians. To do so, we started from the democratic theory, developed by Lijphart (2003), especially the consensual model, which requires negotiation and better reflects the Brazilian political system, characterized by the dispersion of powers and the guarantee of political-institutional expression by minorities. The research problem addresses the effects of rankings on improving the quality of parliamentary representation and the governing capacity of parliaments and on trust in public institutions and democracy. The approach highlights the characteristics of each ranking, its credibility and relevance to the transparency and accountability of institutions in a democratic system. The objective was to understand the connections of these models of parliamentary evaluation, compare their narratives, criteria and results, in addition to pointing out their main defects, whether subjectivity, lack of transparency or level of political, economic or ideological bias. It was found, despite their failures and insufficiencies, that rankings are important for trust in institutions and for the legitimacy of the democratic system, as they are used as a reference for decision-making by journalists, political scientists, economic institutions, rating agencies, businessmen, workers, governments, lobbyists and voters. And it is concluded that there is no ideal methodology, which encompasses or is capable of capturing all dimensions of parliamentary action, both because of the aspects that involve the evaluation of parliamentary performance and the diversity of interest that the members of Congress represent, as well as due to the extent of activities inherent to Parliaments and parliamentarians, such as representing, legislating, allocating public resources, supervising and controlling the acts of the Executive Power etc. Therefore, further studies are recommended with a view to improving political rankings as mechanisms for measuring parliamentary performance in institutional and individual dimensions.

Ficha do documento

Tipo

Dissertação

Ano

2021

Instituição

Fundação Getulio Vargas

Fonte

Repositório da FGV

Idioma

Português

Acesso

Acesso aberto

Identificador

oai:repositorio.fgv.br:10438/31483

Temas

Administração PúblicaDadosGovernança

Palavras-chave

AvaliaçãoDesempenhoParlamentarLiderançaPolíticaRankingEvaluationPerformanceParliamentaryLeadershipPolicyAdministração públicaDesempenho - AvaliaçãoPolíticosBrasil. Congresso NacionalLiderança políticaIndicadores políticos