GOLD Report I - UCLG

LATIN AMERICA170United Cities and Local Governmentsments or privatized by passing responsibilityto privately held or state companies. Resultswere mixed at best. Although this first policycycle did not produce the hoped-for results,it did cause serious social, economic andpolitical problems.The second decentralization cycle took placeat the end of the 1990s, in the midst of thefinancial and social crises that affected countriessuch as Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador,Mexico, Peru and República Bolivarianade Venezuela. It involved strategies to correctthe neo-liberal paradigm with more democraticand social policies. The decentralizationmovement was stimulated by the progress ofmunicipal management of the region. 6Predictably, these great cycles translatedifferently in each sub-region of LatinGraph 1 1980-2005: Evolution of Decentralization in Latin America 7Percentage of the Expenditure of Sub-national Governments in Total Governmental Expenditure6. New paradigms forlocal governmentmanagement cometo light, as in thecases of Curitiba orPorto Alegre, inBrazil; Villa ElSalvador, in Peru;Bogota, in Colombia;Cotacachi andGuayaquil, inEcuador; Santiagode Chile; Mérida, SanPedro Garza Garcíaor San Nicolás de losGarza, in México;Rafaela in Argentina;or La Paz in Bolivia,among many others.7. Sub-nationalexpenditures used asindicators fordecentralization arelimited in nature,given that theyusually aggregatemunicipal andfederal levelexpenditures. Forexample, a higherlevel of expenditurein the provinces inArgentina does notrepresent moremunicipalexpenditure.Brazil 2002 42.1Brazil 1980 32.4 Argentina 2004 41.6Colombia 1982 26.3 Mexico 2000 31.9Argentina 1980 22.2 Colombia 2005 29.8Mexico 1980 22.0 Bolivia 2005 29.5Ecuador 1980 18.3 Peru 2005 26.8Bolivia 1986 14.8 Ecuador 2004 22.1Latin American Average 11.6 Latin American Average 18.8Peru 1990 9.1 Chile 2005 15.0Uruguay 1980 8.6 Uruguay 2005 13.2El Salvador 19 78 5.8 Guatemala 1997 13.0Paraguay 1980 5.5 El Salvador 2005 8.7Guatemala 1980 4.5 Paraguay 2005 7.0Costa Rica 1980 4.0 Dominican Rep 2004 7.0Chile 1980 3.7 Costa Rica 2005 6.0Dominican Rep. 1980 3.5 Nicaragua 2002 3.8Nicaragua 1988 3.4 Panama 2002 3.8Panama 1980 2.0Source: UCLG Country Profiles (2007), National Files.Drawn up by: Mero.