When Procedural Legitimacy Equals Nothing: Civil Society and Foreign Trade Policy in Brazil and Mexico

Abstract

Non-state actors contribute with inputs to the elaboration of the national interest in trade negotiations, thus enhancing its legitimacy. Nevertheless, does the participation of those actors necessarily equal influence on the part of all segments of civil society on policymaking? To answer the question, I argue that procedural legitimacy should be evaluated not only in relation to the inputs society provides to the State, but should also consider whether officials actually analyse societal contributions in decision-making. I demonstrate the empirical application of the model based upon Brazil's experience in multilateral trade negotiations during the 2000s, using Mexico as a shadow case. I conclude that foreign trade policymaking can only be democratised if, in procedural legitimacy, the State attributes equal weight to contributions from all types of societal actors, including civil society organisations and organised social movements, which tend to have less material resources and power than interest groups such as business associations and labour unions.

Reclaiming Domestic Agency: International Investment Agreements and the Defence of Policy Space in Latin America

“…These approaches have been combined with an effort to uncover the institutional conditions under which one group might be particularly influential. Such influence, scholars find, depends on the extent to which a particular group is given, or obtains, formal access to policymakers and state bureaucrats (Mansfield and Bush 1995;Rogowski 1987;Vieira 2016). In the context of a democratic state, big business constituencies, scholars argue, are typically given more privileged access to trade policy arenas because of their pro-trade stance, business expertise and because they are perceived to have more direct stakes in negotiation outcomes.…”