Government-Business Relations in the Construction of Mercosur

Abstract

The analysis of the institutional setting brought by democracy has led to the paradoxical yet interesting consideration that limitations to liberal democracy may have actually favored the integrationist project. Another line of research, drawn from the neo-idealist paradigm, with its emphasis on citizenship, is to ask whether civil society (or significant segments of it) was involved in the process and what its attitude was. The research hypothesis of this chapter is the following: Democracy allows a greater freedom of expression, especially toward decision makers, than authoritarian regimes. As a consequence, economic and societal actors have increased possibilities to making themselves heard. Therefore, should certain economic and society sectors have been supportive of integration, the enhanced capacity to promote their interests in a democratic environment might provide for a possible explanatory link between democratization and regional integration. Put this way, this research hypothesis may seem to place too much emphasis on bottom-up dynamics in the context of a clearly state-led process. To check possible criticism on this ground, it is enough to say that there is no reason why a top-down process may not be accompanied and even supported by a bottom-up movement. Representative and participatory democracy are not mutually exclusive. Additionally, if one accepts that integration was driven by the governments’ desire to fortify democracy, then it has to be conceded that the role that the political class scripted for business in the project was intended to enhance the prospect of success of the project itself but also to be somehow conducive to the reinforcement of democratic institutions.