Tozadenant br Conclusions The results indicate that in
Conclusions The results indicate that, in general, chances in the Brazilian budgetary institutions have contributed to a better primary result of the federal government, particularly those changes captured by the indices that evaluate the budget categories and stages IC and IS and the sub-indices top-down procedures (CA), sustainability and credibility (CC), approval (SII) and budget execution (SIII). Moreover, the results also indicate that in most cases, the institutional changes that occurred from 1985 to 2009 can be considered exogenous to the primary result. This fact does not eliminate the possibility that future changes in budgetary institutions will be motivated by unsatisfactory fiscal results. This issue must be constantly evaluated. The fiscal policy reaction is also noteworthy; according to the estimated models, this reaction reduces the government deficit before an increase in the debt/GDP ratio, which provides evidence that the debt is sustainable.
Acknowledgments The author would like to thank Fabiana Rocha, Basília Aguirre, Enlinson Mattos, Renato Colistete and José Roberto Afonso for the helpful comments on my thesis, which gave rise to this article, and the financial support of UFES and the Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – CAPES) for conducting this study.
Introduction This paper analyzes the strategic role played by the British classical political economy in the process of creating new forms of power relations between the state, Tozadenant and economic reality. The aim is to understand how political economy was relevant for rationalizing and consolidating a form of power that French philosopher Michel Foucault designated as “biopolitics”. The paper takes Foucault\'s writings regarding economic ideas and re-establishes them into a critical analysis of the history of economic thought in order to comprehend how political economy was responsible for the emergence, strengthen and consequences of biopolitical practices. Michel Foucault\'s genealogy of power examined economic thought and other human sciences to understand how individuals became subjects in the modernity. Inasmuch Foucault realized that power is not only repressive, but rather productive (produces subjects, conducts and patterns), he shifted his analyses from disciplinary power to biopolitics. Foucault defined biopolitics as a specific technology of power that emerged in the end of the 18th century and aimed to deal with biological elements of human beings, such as: birth, mode of living, prosperity, health, reproduction and death. Foucault\'s notion of biopolitics can be investigated from a perspective that connects economic discourse and practice with power relations. Although some works written by Tribe (1978), Amariglio (1988) and Lima (2010) made valuable connections between Foucault\'s writings and economics, all of them made reference to Foucault\'s early archeological writings and the epistemic formations of economic theory and discourse, thus not approaching extensively Foucault\'s notions of biopolitics and its consequences to constituting new power relations.
Foucault\'s genealogy of power: the emergence of biopolitics Michel Foucault\'s investigations involved different areas of human, social and medical sciences, such as psychiatry; sexuality; clinic; law; economics; philosophy of science; discourse and language, among others. His vast oeuvre included books, courses, interviews and several lectures that were not separated into isolated phases, rather in theoretical displacements inside the same perspective: to search for the reasons why individuals became subjects in modern age. History had always been a present issue in Foucauldian oeuvre, especially in regard to the transition from archeology to genealogy. The latter became a broader approach once it dealt with non-discursive practices, differing from archeology. With genealogy Foucault continued to investigate the issue of knowledge, but dealing with it from a power perspective: knowledge generates power, and therefore, truth regimes.