The Ford Foundation and the Institutionalization of Political Science in Brazil

  • Leticia Canêdo
Chapter
Part of the Socio-Historical Studies of the Social and Human Sciences book series (SHSSHS)

Abstract

This chapter studies the activity of the Ford Foundation in the academic area of Brazilian social sciences during the Cold War. It analyses the complex arena of academic competition with which the Foundation interacted as it sought to influence the conception and organization of the academic discipline of political science in a direction coherent with its international ambition: to substitute traditional political studies for comparative studies of forms of government and political behavior. The chapter engages in a sociological analysis of the agents involved in this process. It first investigates the encounter of specific Brazilian intellectual groups with two Ford Foundation program officers at a time when Brazilian political space was undergoing a restructuring (1964–1982). It then analyzes (a) the dominant recruitment practices of Foundation agents and (b) the scholarship recipients they selected; studying their family situation, college degrees, scholarships, careers and investment in their professional development. It also takes account of the position of Brazilian political scientists in the competition for national hegemony among political elites from different States in the Federation.

Keywords

Almeida, Cândido Mendes de ANPOCS Assessor Committee in Social Sciences Bell, Peter Cardoso, Fernando Henrique Carvalho, José Murilo CEBRAP Cintra, Antonio Octavio Dados: Revista de Ciências Sociais DCP EBAP/FGV Estudos CEBRAB FACE Farias, Vilmar Ford Foundation FORD/ANPOCS fellowship program Forman, Shepard IUPERJ Lamounier, Bolivar Mauck, Elwyn Reis, Fabio Wanderley Revista Brasileira de Estudos Políticos Schwartzman, Simon 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Afranio Garcia and Joana Canedo for discussing various aspects of this paper. The research on which this paper is based has been supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo, FAPESP.

References

  1. Barros, A.N. 2013. Uma narrativa sobre os cursos de Administração da FACE/UFMG, PhD dissertation, UFMG.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, P. 2010. Interview by Lacerda, G. and Rangel, T. História Oral do CEPED, FGV DIREITO RIO. http://direitorio.fgv.br/sites/direitorio.fgv.br/files/PeterBell.pdf
  3. Bernstein, A.R. 2013. Funding the Future: Philanthropy’s Influence on American Higher Education. New York: R & L Education.Google Scholar
  4. Boncourt, T. 2015. The Transnational Circulation of Scientific Ideas: Importing Behavioralism in European Political Science (1950–1970). Journal of History of the Behavioral Sciences 51 (2): 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. ———. 2016. La science internationale comme ressource. RFS 57 (3): 529–561.Google Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. 2002. Les conditions sociales de la circulation internationale des idées. ARSS 145 (1): 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Canêdo, L. 2009. Les boursiers de La Fondation Ford et la recomposition des sciences sociales brésiliennes. Cahiers de la recherche sur l’éducation et les savoirs, hors-série.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2013. Herdeiros, militantes, cientistas políticos (1964–2010). In Estratégias educativas das elites nacionais no mundo globalizado, ed. L. Canêdo and K. Tomizaki, 24–53. São Paulo: HUCITEC.Google Scholar
  9. Carvalho, J.M. 1980. A construção da ordem: a elite política imperial. Rio de Janeiro: Campus.Google Scholar
  10. Castro, C.M. 2016. A mágica do Dr. Yvon. Belo Horizonte: Benvinda.Google Scholar
  11. Chambers, A. 2004. A Conversation with Peter Bell. Yale News. http://alumninet.yale.edu/classes/yc1962/pbell0804.html
  12. Dezalay, Y. 2004. Les courtiers de l’international. ARSS 151–152: 4–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Engelmann, F. 2012. O espaço jurídico brasileiro e as condições de uso do capital internacional. In Estratégias educativas das elites nacionais no mundo globalizado, ed. L. Canêdo and K. Tomizaki, 130–153. São Paulo: HUCITEC.Google Scholar
  14. Forjaz, M.C.S. 1997. A emergência da Ciência Política acadêmica no Brasil: aspectos institucionais. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais 12 (35).Google Scholar
  15. Forman, S.L. 2011. Interview by L.L. Oliveira and H.M. Aragão. Rio de Janeiro: CPDOC/FGV.Google Scholar
  16. Gaither, H.R., Jr. 1949. Report of the Study for the Ford Foundation on Policy and Program. Detroit: Ford Foundation.Google Scholar
  17. Garcia, A. 2009. Les disciplines de la ‘Mission française’ et la reception de l’anthropologie structural au Brésil. Cahiers de la recherche sur l’éducation et les savoirs, hors-série 2: 56–92.Google Scholar
  18. Gemelli, G. 1995. Fernand Braudel. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
  19. Gemelli, G., and R. Macleod, eds. 2003. American Foundations in Europe. Brussels: P.I.E.- Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  20. Hauptmann, E. 2012. The Ford Foundation and the Rise of Behavioralism in Political Science. Journal of History of the Behavioral Sciences 48 (2): 154–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holmes, J.M. 2013. From Modernization and Development to Neoliberal Democracy: A History of the Ford Foundation in Latin America 1959–2000. Bates College, Honors Theses. Paper 75.Google Scholar
  22. Keinert, F.C., and D.P. Silva. 2010. A gênese da ciência política brasileira. Tempo Social 22 (1): 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kennedy, J.F.K. 1961. Preliminary Formulations of the Alliance for Progress. The Department of State Bulletin 44 (1136): 471–474.Google Scholar
  24. Lamounier, B. 2013. Interview by H.M. Bomeny. Rio de Janeiro: CPDOC/FGV.Google Scholar
  25. Lazarsfeld, P.F. 1969. An Episode in the History of Social Research: A Memoir. In The Intellectual Migration: Europe and America, 1930–1960, ed. D. Fleming and B. Bailyn, 270–337. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Lopes, J.P. 1993. Trinta anos da Fundação Ford no Brasil. In A Fundação Ford no Brasil, ed. S. Miceli, 155–163. São Paulo: Sumaré/FAPESP.Google Scholar
  27. Loureiro, M.R., and E.R. Bastos. 2008. Elisa Reis. In Conversas com sociólogos brasileiros, Relatório 11/2008, 159–178. São Paulo: FGV/EAESP.Google Scholar
  28. Machado, M.B. 1993. A Fundação Ford, a FINEP e as ciências sociais. In A Fundação Ford no Brasil, ed. S. Miceli, 99–105. São Paulo: Sumaré/FAPESP.Google Scholar
  29. Massi, F.P. 1989. Franceses e norte-americanos nas ciências sociais brasileiras (1930–1960). In História das ciências sociais no Brasil, ed. S. Miceli, 410–460. IDESP/Vertice/Finep: Sao Paulo.Google Scholar
  30. Mauck, E.A. 1954. Establishment of a Public Administration Training Program in the School of Economic Sciences, U.M.G, U.S. Operations Mission to Brazil, Under a Project Agreement Between the Institute of Inter-American Affairs and the University of Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte: Departamento de Imprensa Nacional.Google Scholar
  31. Miceli, S., ed. 1989. História das ciências sociais no Brasil. São Paulo: IDESP/Vertice/Finep.Google Scholar
  32. ———. 1993. A aposta numa comunidade científica emergente. A Fundação Ford e os cientistas sociais no Brasil. In A Fundação Ford no Brasil, ed. S. Miceli, 35–97. São Paulo: Sumaré/FAPESP.Google Scholar
  33. Mota, C.G. 2006. Para uma visão de conjunto: a história do Brasil pós-1930 e seus juristas. In Os juristas na formação do Estado-Nação Brasileiro, ed. C.G. Mota, 23–146. São Paulo: Quartier Latin.Google Scholar
  34. Oliveira, L.L., et al. 1998. Entrevista com José Murilo de Carvalho. Estudos Históricos 12 (22): 357–378.Google Scholar
  35. Paiva, A.R. 2010. Entrevista com José Murilo de Carvalho. Desigualdade & Diversidade 7: 227–252.Google Scholar
  36. Parmar, I. 2012. Foundations of the American Century: The Ford, Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations in the Rise of American Power. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Paula, J.A. 2006. O ensino e a pesquisa em economia na Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Análise 17 (2): 329–344.Google Scholar
  38. Pollack, M. 1979. Paul F. Lazarsfeld, fondateur d’une multinationale scientifique. ARSS 25 (1): 45–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Reis, F.W. 2004. Minas e as Ciências Sociais: evocações e alguma polêmica. Teoria e Sociedade, número especial: Imagens de Minas – Homenagem a Fernando Correia Dias:14–31.Google Scholar
  40. Rose, K. 2003. American Foundations in Modern Turkey: The Rockfeller and Ford Foundation. In American Foundations in Europe, ed. R. Gemelli and R. Macleod, 73–94. Brussels: P.I.E.–Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  41. Schwartzman, S. 1975. São Paulo e o Estado Nacional. São Paulo: DIFEL.Google Scholar
  42. ———. 2009. Interview by H.M. Bomeny. Rio de Janeiro: CPDOC/FGV.Google Scholar
  43. Sorj, B. 2001. A construção intelectual do Brasil contemporâneo. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.Google Scholar
  44. Trubek, D.M. 1996. Law and Development: Then and Now. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law) 90: 223–226.Google Scholar
  45. Werneck, L., and H.A. Sturm. 2012. Para os EUA, Brasil era campo de batalha na Guerra Fria. O Estado de São Paulo. 09/16/2012.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leticia Canêdo
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidade Estadual de Campinas, UNICAMPSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations