A diagonal and social protection plus approach to meet the challenges of the COVID-19 syndemic: cash transfers and intimate partner violence interventions in Latin America.

Latin America has been particularly hard hit by the COVID-19 syndemic, including the associated economic fallout that has threatened the livelihoods of most families. Social protection platforms and policies should have a crucial role in safeguarding individual and family wellbeing; however, the response has been insufficient to address the scale of the crisis. In this Viewpoint, we focus on two policy challenges of the COVID-19 syndemic: rapidly and effectively providing financial support to the many families that lost livelihoods, and responding to and mitigating the increased risk of intimate partner violence (IPV). We argue that building programmatic linkages between social protection platforms, particularly cash transfers, and IPV prevention, mitigation, and response services, creates synergies that can promote freedom from both poverty and violence.

Who cares in Nicaragua? A care regime in an exclusionary social policy context.

In Latin American countries with historically strong social policy regimes (such as those in the Southern Cone), neoliberal policies are usually blamed for the increased burden of female unpaid work. However, studying the Nicaraguan care regime in two clearly defined periods ­ the Sandinista and the neoliberal eras ­ suggests that this argument may not hold in the case of countries with highly familialist social policy regimes. Despite major economic, political and policy shifts, the role of female unpaid work, both within the family and in the community, remains persistent and pivotal, and was significant long before the onset of neoliberal policies. Nicaragua's care regime has been highly dependent on the 'community' or 'voluntary' work of mostly women. This has also been, and continues to be, vital for the viability of many public social programmes.

[Pressure or legitimization? Power and alternatives in the planning and adoption of health reforms in Costa Rica, 1988-1998]. / ?Presión o legitimación? Poder y alternativas en el diseño y adopción de la reforma de salud en Costa Rica, 1988-1998.

Policies are made in response to the rationale of pressure and legitimization, which join forces in many different ways. This work analyzes the planning and adoption of the health reforms undertaken in Costa Rica between 1988 and 1998. It questions whether political parties, international financial institutions and the technical and bureaucratic elites in each sector can be taken as sufficiently explanatory of themselves. Empirical evidence would suggest that apart from investigating the individual interests of the agents involved, one must also consider the sector reforms that are actually available internationally. The paper draws this discussion into the larger scenario of policy making in Latin America and draws links between this and other stages in policy making and other moments in the construction of the State.

¿Presión o legitimación? Poder y alternativas en el diseño y adopción de la reforma de salud en Costa Rica, 1988-1998 / Pressure or legitimization? Power and alternatives in the planning and adoption of health reforms in Costa Rica, 1988-1998

La formación de políticas responde a lógicas de presión y legitimación que se combinan de distintas maneras. Este trabajo analiza el diseño y adopción de dos políticas de reforma de salud realizadas en Costa Rica entre 1988 y 1998. El trabajo se pregunta si son los partidos políticos, las instituciones financieras internacionales y las elites tecnoburocráticas sectoriales factores explicativos suficientes. La evidencia empírica sugiere que además de intereses particulares de los actores involucrados, es necesario considerar las agendas de reforma sectorial internacionalmente disponibles. El trabajo aproxima este debate a la formación de políticas en América Latina y facilita los análisis que permiten tender puentes entre otras etapas de la formación de políticas y otros momentos históricos de la construcción del Estado.(AU)Policies are made in response to the rationale of pressure and legitimization, which join forces in many different ways. This work analyzes the planning and adoption of the health reforms undertaken in Costa Rica between 1988 and 1998. It questions whether political parties, international financial institutions and the technical and bureaucratic elites in each sector can be taken as sufficiently explanatory of themselves. Empirical evidence would suggest that apart from investigating the individual interests of the agents involved, one must also consider the sector reforms that are actually available internationally. The paper draws this discussion into the larger scenario of policy making in Latin America and draws links between this and other stages in policy making and other moments in the construction of the State.(AU)

¿Presión o legitimación? Poder y alternativas en el diseño y adopción de la reforma de salud en Costa Rica, 1988-1998 / Pressure or legitimization? Power and alternatives in the planning and adoption of health reforms in Costa Rica, 1988-1998

La formación de políticas responde a lógicas de presión y legitimación que se combinan de distintas maneras. Este trabajo analiza el diseño y adopción de dos políticas de reforma de salud realizadas en Costa Rica entre 1988 y 1998. El trabajo se pregunta si son los partidos políticos, las instituciones financieras internacionales y las elites tecnoburocráticas sectoriales factores explicativos suficientes. La evidencia empírica sugiere que además de intereses particulares de los actores involucrados, es necesario considerar las agendas de reforma sectorial internacionalmente disponibles. El trabajo aproxima este debate a la formación de políticas en América Latina y facilita los análisis que permiten tender puentes entre otras etapas de la formación de políticas y otros momentos históricos de la construcción del Estado.

Policies are made in response to the rationale of pressure and legitimization, which join forces in many different ways. This work analyzes the planning and adoption of the health reforms undertaken in Costa Rica between 1988 and 1998. It questions whether political parties, international financial institutions and the technical and bureaucratic elites in each sector can be taken as sufficiently explanatory of themselves. Empirical evidence would suggest that apart from investigating the individual interests of the agents involved, one must also consider the sector reforms that are actually available internationally. The paper draws this discussion into the larger scenario of policy making in Latin America and draws links between this and other stages in policy making and other moments in the construction of the State.