Claudia Pires de Castro: Head of the Research

Helena Gonçalves: http://lattes.cnpq.br/9358883083223217
Ph.D. Candidate in Social Sciences in Education, Postgraduate Program in Education, Faculty of Education from the University of Campinas (Unicamp); Master in Social Sciences from the University of Campinas (Unicamp); Bachelor’s Degree in Social Sciences from the University of São Paulo (USP) with specializations in Ethics (USP-UniVesp); in History, Culture and Society (PUC-SP); member of the Research Group on Sociocultural Differentiation (Unicamp); member of the Brazilian Association for the Teaching of Social Sciences (ABECS).

Igor José Siquieri Savenhago: http://lattes.cnpq.br/9377340948989879
Ph.D. Candidate and Master in Science, Technology, and Society from the Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar); Bachelor’s Degree in Social Communication (Journalism). Member of Brazilian Association for Social Studies of Sciences and Technologies (Esocite.BR). Member of the Communication Center at the University of Franca-SP (Unifran); Docent for undergraduate Social Communication (Journalism and Advertising & PR) at the University of Franca-SP.

Ademilson Carlos Teixeira: http://lattes.cnpq.br/7632595239667565
Ph.D. Candidate and Master in Science, Technology, and Society (CTS) from the University of Campinas (Unicamp). Bachelor’s Degree in Social Communication (Journalism) from the Pontifical Catholic University Campinas (PUC–CAMPINAS). Postgraduate in Educational Management and Teaching in Higher Education and Postgraduate in MBA in Strategic Management of Integrated Communication with Emphasis in Public Communication and Social Responsibility (Unimetrocamp).

Ivete Dorr Labres: http://lattes.cnpq.br/4198607794826421
Postdoctoral Fellow in Social Psychology from the Universidad Argentina John F. Kennedy. Ph.D. in Social Psychology from the Universidad Argentina John F. Kennedy. Master in Business Sciences from the Fernando Pessoa University (Portugal). Specialist’s degree in Marketing from the Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-RJ). Specialist’s degree in People Management from the Faculdade Candido Mendes – RJ. Bachelor’s Degree in Psychology from the Unisinos – Universidade do Rio dos Sinos – RS.

Adriana Luisa Alves Ortiz: http://lattes.cnpq.br/4198607794826421
Bachelor’s Student in International Relations from the Federal University Foundation of Grande Dourados (UFGD). Volunteer Internship in What’s Rel? Website. Digital Volunteer as “Multiplier” from the Civil Society Organization Politize!. Volunteer Researcher in Cátedra Jean Monnet from the Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP). Organizer in “Youth protagonism in volunteering and international education – what changes with the pandemic?” at the International Youth Day Event. Volunteer as “Digital Mobilizer” in the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

Introduction
Since the technological revolution started in the 1960s, the new information and communication technologies (ICTs) are digitization, network communication, and interactivity. These technologies can change human relations by proposing, new spaces for interaction and other possibilities. Santos (2006) states that new techniques create new spaces and vice versa. However, it is not possible to think of them in a disconnected way from those who create them. There is a mutual dialogic implication between subjects and objects, which, is fundamental for the self-organization and transformation of individuals and groups according to the author. The popularization of the Internet since the 1990s has intensified the connection between people.

The social media emerging in digital spaces began to integrate this process, making the construction of knowledge in the network more plural and contributing to establishing a multiplatform, multifaceted, convergent society. This increases the importance of employing them as a research tool, as well as requires an improvement of management and technological mediation, aiming to understand the effects of innovations in this field.

Therefore, this scenario stimulates new questionings and movements in science. From this understanding to comprehend and outline paths and strategies for a plural and complex society, it is necessary to dialogically involve several fields of knowledge in an interdisciplinary effort. This research group proposal is not only to observe the incorporation of new media devices and languages in society but what factors favor it and how they help to demarcate a new production of meanings in the perceptions and representations of the world.

Theoretical background
Although the Brazilian reality is quite heterogeneous in terms of connection and quality of internet access, Brazilians have included computers, tablets, and smartphones in the list of essential consumer goods, regardless of social class. These tools allowed the expansion of social networks to digital environments through various platforms, making it possible to perform a variety of tasks from home. Some examples are shopping, making payments and bank transfers, meeting friends, participating in cultural events, and starting affectionate relationships among others.

The acceleration of the ways of living directly affects social interaction models, also promotes a transformation of the intimacy of social actors (GIDDENS, 1995), as the construction of identities becomes increasingly more reflexive. Living in a society marked by constant technological advancement implies moving through contexts of uncertainty, in which some of the ways found to stabilize the meanings given to everyday life is by searching for information and intense communications.

To investigate this global phenomenon, this research group starts from two assumptions. First, it considers that physical and digital spaces are integrated through the everyday experiences of social actors (MILLER, 2016; BOYD, 2014). Second, the speed involved in contemporary societies has made the communication society emerge, in which traditional structures are resignified through the high reflexivity of the actors. This high reflexivity, in turn, is influenced by social interactions that are inserted in a spiral of interdependent interactions, in which social and psychological factors constitute the action of social actors (BLUMMER, 1977).

According to Hine (2015), the Internet is not only embedded in society but incorporated into daily human activities in a way that there is no separation between physical and digital spaces, i.e., one is an extension of the other. Habermas (2003) points out that the emergence of physical spaces allows social actors to make their ideas public. The public sphere always has a judging audience, and this judgment’s object is publicized. Thus, physical spaces or “public sphere” would be an area in social life where individuals expose subjects of general interest for discussion, debates, criticisms, controversial opinions, aiming at a possible consensus.

To understand how social actors make sense of new technologies, create bonds, and carry out their everyday practices, interdisciplinary research is guided by participant observation. To look closely and from the inside (MAGNANI, 2002) of the web of interactions (GEERTZ, 2008) produced in these spaces, researchers, are also in the process of building and transforming their views while simultaneously building the object of study. Thiollent (2011) explains that, in participatory research, the researcher can also assume the investigated role, in addition to seeking horizontal communication between the members of a group. This dialogue is an important data collection tool, and the main objective of the study is not to solve a specific problem, but to broaden the discussion about social dynamics so that solutions can be jointly thought out and implemented.

In this context, Morin (2003) argues that the complexity of human relations places us before the need for interdisciplinary approaches. To break up the studies of the universe into specific areas would be to contribute to the isolation and consequent fragmentation of knowledge. This is not coherent with the game of order and disorder that constitutes society and eliminates clear boundaries between individuals and groups and of these about the systems of which they are part.

In this scenario of approximation and cooperation in constructing knowledge, the concept of social capital proposed by Putnam (1996) is also considered. Social capital is defined as characteristics of social organization that, based on trust, favor coordinated actions, aim to increase the efficiency of society. Thus, this happens in the following sense: since social capital is cumulative, i.e., it is built socially and historically and grows as it is used, the trust established in specific groups is extended to a community scope, which encourages collective participation and contributes to strengthening democracy. This goal is also shared by this research group.

To establish the field of investigation, we take as reference the dialog with authors mentioned above as well as others concerned with pertinent themes, that might be also incorporated according to the needs identified in the field.

Justification
Inspired by the polymedia proposed by Daniel Miller (2019), we see social media as relational places where people interact and coexist, promoting the integration between physical and digital spaces through their uses of technologies and sharing of experiences on digital social networks.

Barnes and Bott, two classic authors considered pioneers in these studies, position social network as a category of analysis that can be worked with several conceptual frameworks. For the authors, it is the ethnographic character that makes the concept work (BARNES, 1964; BOTT, 1976) and not a formal theory that establishes a universal law. This means that an ethnographic approach constitutes the basis for investigating interactions that support and organize such networks in the physical and digital spaces. Given the widespread use of social media and its impact on a wide range of social phenomena, this group understands that it is possible to explore, expand, and promote research on social media from Brazilian agents inserted in different contexts, reflecting and interweaving these studies and several disciplines through interdisciplinary and interparadigmatic dialogues. Thus, the research motivation is to map and expand research on social media, bringing together different approaches, from theoretical to empirical explorations.

Goals
Social Media Studies Research Group aims at:
− Build interdisciplinary networks of researchers in the field of Social Media Studies to conduct research focused on the reality permeated by Brazilian actors, and to develop other academic activities for the improvement of this field;
− Foster and conduct high-quality research and develop new ideas in the field of social media;
− Create a pleasant, cooperative, and democratic work environment for the group members,giving all participants the possibility to carry out their research, acquire and share
knowledge.

Periodicity
The Social Media Studies Research Group will hold at least one meeting a month, in which the group members will discuss: topics and status of the research, publication planning, event calendar, and participation in conferences, congresses, and other subjects.

Network strategy
The Social Media Studies Research Group currently has a staff of 5 members:
Claudia Pires de Castro: Head of the Research

References
BARNES, J.A. (1964). “Class and Committees in a Norwegian Island Parish”. Human Relations, n. 7.
BOYD, Danah (2014). It’s Complicated: the social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press.
BOTT, Elisabeth (1976). Família e rede social. RJ, Francisco Alves.
BLUMER, H. A sociedade concebida como uma interação simbólica. In: BIRNBAUM, P.; CHAZEL, F. (1977). Teoria sociológica. São Paulo: Hucitec; EDUSP.
MAGNANI, José Guilherme Cantor (2002). De perto e de dentro: notas para uma etnografia urbana. Rev. bras. Ci. Soc., São Paulo, v. 17, n. 49, p. 11-29, June 2002 . Available from <http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102- 69092002000200002&lng=en&nrm=iso>. access on 16 Dec. 2020.
BLUMLER, J. G. (1979). The role of theory in uses and gratifications studies. Communication Research, 6, 9–36.
BLUMLER, J. G. (1985). The social character of media gratifications. In K. E. Rosengren, L. A.
Wenner, & P. Palmgreen (Eds.), Media gratifications research: Current perspectives (pp. 41–59). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
GEERTZ, Cliford (2008). O saber local: novos ensaios em antropologia interpretativa. Petrópolis: Vozes.
GIDDENS, Anthony (1995). A vida numa sociedade pós-tradicional. In: Modernização reflexiva. São Paulo: Unesp.
GIDDENS, Anthony (2002). Modernidade e identidade. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Editor.
HABERMAS, Jürgen (2003). Mudança estrutural da esfera pública: investigações quanto a uma categoria da sociedade burguesa. Rio de Janeiro: Tempo Brasileiro.
HINE, Christine (2015). Ethnography for the Internet: Embedded, Embodied, and Everyday. London / New York: Bloomsbury. (e-book).
JUNQUEIRA, Flávia Campos (2011). Choque, afetividade e experiência estética: linguagem e percepção em Um homem com uma câmera na mão e sua pertinência contemporânea. Disponível em: https://repositorio.ufjf.br/jspui/bitstream/ufjf/2138/1/flaviacamposjunqueira.pdf. Acesso em 24 de fevereiro de 2021.
MILLER, Daniel et al. (2016) How the world changed Social Media, London: UCL Press.
MEIO DIGITAL. (2006). São Paulo: Ed. Abril, n. 01, out. 2006.
MORIN, Edgar (2003). A cabeça bem-feita: repensar a reforma, reformar o pensamento. 8. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil.
PUTNAM, Robert D. (1996). Comunidade e Democracia: a experiência da Itália moderna. Trad. Luiz Alberto Monjardim. Rio de Janeiro. Editora Fundação Getúlio Vargas.
SENNETT, Richard (2004) A corrosão do caráter – conseqüências pessoais do trabalho no novo capitalismo. Rio de Janeiro. Record.
SANTOS, Milton (2006). A natureza do espaço: técnica e tempo, razão e emoção. 4. ed. São Paulo: Edusp.
THIOLLENT, Michel (2011). Metodologia da Pesquisa-ação. São Paulo: Cortez.

Luíza Cerioli: Luíza is a Political Science Ph.D. candidate at the Centre for Near and Middle East Studies (CNMS) at the University of Marburg. She holds a Master’s in International Relations from the University of Brasília (UnB). Her research aims at nuanced frameworks of International Relations to cope with the complexity of studying multifaced relations between states. Her research interests range from Global IR, Middle Eastern foreign policy, IR theory, Neoclassical Realism, and the intersections between identity, ideology, and gender within International Relations

Fernanda Barasuol: Fernanda holds a Ph.D. in International Strategic Studies from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Brazil. She has also been a visiting Researcher at American University, Washington DC (2015-2016). In addition, she is currently a visiting professor at the Federal University of Grande Dourados (UFGD). Her research interests include IR theory, Global IR, gender, and the connections between academia and policymaking.

Mariana Kalil: Mariana is an Assistant Professor at the Brazilian War College, Deputy Head of the Post-Grad Program in International Security and Defense at the Brazilian War College, Ph.D. and MSc in International Relations at the University of Brasília, Brazil. Mariana defended her Ph.D. in November 2017, presenting extensive research on Brazil’s theoretical contribution to International Relations. Besides quantitative and qualitative methodologies, the sociology of science and the philosophy of science offered fundamental bases for unveiling what she dubbed Rationalism in Exile – a product of the country’s way of thinking IR.

Audrey Alejandro: Audrey works at the crossroads of International Relations, Sociology and Political Science. She researches discourse and knowledge, the role they play in society, how scholars can apprehend their effects and what it takes to produce discourses and knowledge that help to create a world consistent with our objectives and values. Audrey joined the Department of Methodology at the London School of Economics in 2018. Previously, she was a Lecturer in Politics and International Relations at Queen Mary University of London and a Fellow at both the London School of Economics and at Sciences Bordeaux, where she received her Ph.D. in Political Science in 2015. She also held visiting positions at the Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi, India, and at the International Relations Institute of the University of São Paulo, Brazil.

Alice Castellani?

Andre Luis Reis da Silva: André is an Associate Professor in International Relations and at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), associated with both the Political Science and the Strategic Studies post-graduate programs. He has a doctor in Political Science and a master’s in History, both from UFRGS. He researches contemporaneous International Relations, focusing on emerging countries and Brazilian Foreign Policy. He has a pos-doctorate in International Relations at the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London and a Specialization in Integration Processes by the University of Leiden, Netherlands. He is also the vice-president of the Economic and International Relations department in UFRGS, coordinates the GESPI (Research Group on Security and International Politics), and researcher from CEGOV (Center of International Studies about Government). He was a visiting professor in 2015 and 2017 at the ISRI in Mozambique, in 2017 at the Beijing Foreign Studies University and in 2018 at the Université de Montpellier. He is a member of an international network about foreign policy from Brazil and Argentina and a member of the European Union at the Crossroads of Global Order (EUCROSS). Finally, he was from the directory board of ABRI (2019-2021), coordinated the Editorial Series “Global South: International Relations and Development in the 21st century”, and the National Forum in Political Science/IR researchers at CAPES.

Marília Pereira: Marília is a Senior Scholar of the International Relations Research Center (NUPRI-USP), and an International Relations Professor at Fundação Álvares Penteado (FECAP-SP), both in São Paulo, Brazil. In 2015, Marilia was a Visiting Scholar at the Moynihan Institute of Global Affairs at the Maxwell School-Syracuse University, when she became a researcher at the Global Black Spots Group. Her main research subject is the South American Regional Security and its dynamics of hybrid governance caused by criminal actors, such as drug traffickers and militias. Since 2011, Marília is one of the responsible for the Teaching and Research in International Politics (TRIP) which has brought an enormous contribution to the Brazilian IR community. In the last three years, she has participated actively at the Global South Caucus at the ISA. Since 2017, Marilia is the chair of the Thematic Area “Teaching, Research and Extension” at the International Relations Brazilian Association (ABRI). In addition, she became in 2020 the chair of the Thematic Area of “International Security and Defense” of the Brazilian Association of Defense Studies (ABED), where she will also foster research networks for this TA for the next two years.

Jacqueline A. Braveboy-Wagner: Jacqueline is a Professor at the City University of New York (CUNY) and a specialist in foreign policy, diplomacy and development, particularly with respect to small states (and specifically Caribbean states) as well as the nations of the Global South. Apart from her scholarly work, which includes 11 books, she was the first Caribbean woman to serve as president of the Caribbean Studies Association (1992-3). Before that, she served as the CSA’s newsletter editor and then as Vice President. From 1995 to 2010, she served as the United Nations-NGO representative of the International Studies Association. In addition, she has served on the Governing Council, on the Executive Committee, the Committee on Ethics and Responsibilities and other committees of ISA. In 2011, she was awarded the Ladd Hollist award for significant service to the association at the annual ISA convention. She then found the Global South Caucus of the ISA (GSCIS) in 2012, a grouping aimed at bringing often-marginalized African, Asian (including Central Asian) and Latin American scholars and scholarship into the mainstream of IR. She served as the Chair of the GSCIS until 2015 and co-chair through 2016. Under her watch, the caucus held outreach conferences in Menton, Singapore and Havana. In 2019 she was honored by ISA for her contributions to scholarship on and activities concerning the Global South.

Silvia Ferabolli: Silvia is a Lecturer in the Department of Economics and International Relations at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), in Brazil. She holds a Ph.D. in Politics and International Studies from the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London. Her focus is on intra-Arab politics, approaching it via decolonial and critical lenses. Currently, she coordinates the Graduate Programme in International Strategic Studies at UFRGS. Moreover, she coordinates a research project about learning and International Relations of the Arab World, theoretically and methodologically grounded by Paulo Freire’s philosophy of education, and centering on the studies of Global regions. This project is concerned with constructing a less Western-centric discipline and, therefore, truly global in its form, scope and contents.

Introduction

A growing number of scholars are putting in check the Western dominance of International Relations (IR), arguing the discipline lacks diversity in theory, themes, and demographics (Acharya and Buzan 2007; Hurrell 2016; Buzan 2016; Alejandro 2019). Mainstream IR is frequently criticized for excluding from its theory-building phenomena and voices from non-Western regions, limiting the discipline’s capability to be truly international (Acharya 2014; Buzan and Acharya 2019; Gelardi 2019). Many have called for greater reflexivity and pluralism to create a genuinely Global IR, promoting dialogue between existing traditions, incorporating non-Western knowledge, and investigating how the scholarly and its concepts are applied, modified, and expanded in the Global South. Thus, Global IR is a collective initiative, a movement, designed to establish and propagate a framework of IR inquiry that is diverse and plural. It seeks tools to comprehend the ever-changing global order, its intricate power diffusion patterns, and how and why social, economic, and political adjustments happen in many parts of the world (Buzan and Acharya 2019; Hurrell 2016; Gelardi 2019). With that in mind, this group aims to explore, enlarge, and promote research linking Global IR with what is produced in, by, and for Brazil.

Justification

Brazil is often in the discipline’s spotlight not only for its position, resources, and size but also for belonging to a non-Western emerging group of influential countries. In the last fifteen years, the field grew enormously in the country, translating into diversification of national IR programs, greater qualitative and quantitative participation of IR scholars in international organizations, and much more international visibility (Barasuol, Silva 2016). For those reasons and more, Brazil can provide new spaces to study IR and develop dissident knowledge (Alejandro 2019). However, the development of IR theory in, for, and by Brazilians is still far from its potential (Lessa 2006, Julião 2009). Nevertheless, Brazil has much to contribute to the de-Westernization of IR, which is the focus of this research group. We seek Brazilian knowledge about foreign policy and international behavior under a Global IR perspective, aware that research from Brazilian or Brazilian-based scholars can propose pathways to de-Westernize the discipline.

This research group seeks to promote interdisciplinary and interparadigmatic dialogues, bridging the gap between scholars from different areas, backgrounds, or regions. It instigates scholars to question themselves: what is endogenous-based IR in Brazil? How to acknowledge perspectives, voices, and points of view from the Global South? How to make the local-global? Is there a South within the Global South? In this sense, the group proposes advancing the discipline by inclusion and reimagination, embracing the possibilities of diffusion of power within academia, while exploring how concepts travel, translate, and readapt in Brazil. If the discipline is done by and for the whole world, it inherently must have multiple foundations and voices (Alejandro 2019). Our motivation is to map and expand the Brazilian IR as one of those foundations.

Goals

The BRaS Global IR and Brazil research group aims at:

– Bring together scholars from distinct academic levels and different parts of the world interested in Global IR theorization, particularly focusing on Latin America and Brazil, as well as those working with Brazilian practical theory, theory building, or theory testing.

– Create a welcoming and open research environment in which scholars can strengthen their academic network while carrying out innovative and high-quality research – collectively or

– Promote vertical and horizontal collaboration between researchers, in which we can present our in-developing work for detailed feedback in regular meetings, as well as discuss relevant new publications on the topic of Global IR and Brazilian IR

– Provide institutional structure through BRaS for integrating members’ work, developing diverse academic activities, organizing events, and sharing research via different

– Understanding Global IR as a movement, we have the axiological motivation of finding pathways to transform the discipline via more reflexive, plural, and integrative knowledge For that matter, early career scholars are particularly welcome, and interdisciplinary attitudes towards science are encouraged.

Frequency

 The periodicity will be defined collectively after the first meetings. Ideally, we should have at least 1 meeting every month.

References
Acharya, Amitav; Buzan, Berry (2007): ‘Why is The No Non-Western International Relations Theory? An Introduction. In International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 7 (4), p. 387-312.
Alejandro, Audrey (2019): Western dominance in international relations? The internationalisation of IR in Brazil and India. London, New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group
Barasuol, Fernanda; da Silva, André Reis (2016) International Relations Theory in Brazil: trend and challenges in teaching and research. In Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, 59 (2): p, 1-20
Buzan, Berry (2016): Could IR Be Different? In International Studies Review, 18 (1), p. 155–157
Buzan, Berry; Acharya, Amitav (2019): The Making of Global International Relations. Origins and Evolution of IR at its Centenary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gelardi, Maiken (2019): ‘Moving Global IR Forward—A Road Map’. In International Studies Review, 22 (4), p. 830–852
Hurrell, Andrew (2016): ‘Towards the Global Study of International Relations’. In Revista Brasileira de Política Intenational, 59 (2), p. 1-18
Julião, Taís Sandrim. (2009): ‘O Brasil no Mundo e o Mundo no Brasil: a formação de quadros, a produção de conhecimento e a construção da área de Relações Internacionais’. Dissertation (Masters in International Relations) – Instituto de Relações Internacionais, University of Brasília.
Lessa, Antônio Carlos (2005): A evolução recente dos estudos e dos programas de pós-graduação em Relações Internacionais no Brasil. In: Meridiano 47: Boletim de Análise de Conjuntura em Relações Internacionais, n. 68, p. 14-

MA Jayane dos Santos Maia

MA Thaís Cavalcante Martins

Introduction
The revival – still shy – of the subnational politics in Political Science comes from the fact that many countries when they took part in the decentralization process of government, contributed to the emergence of local political-party dynamics that stand out from the national politics, at the same time that they hang together (Falleti, 2010). Some authors, for example, shed light on the influence of local leaders on the national scenario by arguing that subnational party systems play a role in casting candidates to compete in national elections (Gervasoni, 2011; Gibson & Suarez-Cao, 2010). Moreover, subnational elections may also account for the electoral results in national elections (Spoon & West, 2015) and impact the context of national congressional elections (Jones 1997; Kikuchi and Lodola 2014).

Justification
In federal countries, interparty competition at the subnational level is a fundamental feature of these systems, in which political parties can be considered “multi-level organizations”, as they compete in different localities to maximize their power by gaining electoral capillarity (Suarez-Cao & Freidenberg, 2012; Deschouwer, 2006). On the one hand, recent efforts have been made by social scientists to bring up studies highlighting the importance of subnational politics to a deeper understanding of national politics. On the other hand, local politics has a peculiar character, as it has its actors and patterns of competition that form a singular political context in each state, province, or municipality.
Nonetheless, in comparative literature, there are still few works that deal with subnational politics in federal countries and the way the political parties fulfill their responsibilities and interact with each other in subnational contexts (Gibson & Suarez-Cao, 2010; Boogers & Voerman, 2010; Deschouwer, 2006). Therefore, a complete analysis of politics in federal countries should consider sub-national patterns of party competition that might differ from those observed at the national level (Gibson & Suarez-Cao, 2010). As Gervasoni (2011: 76) argues, even though sub-national governments are less autonomous than national ones, it does not mean that they are less important. New research focusing on the analysis of electoral results at the disaggregate level (subnational units) could bring to light more trustworthy conclusions about electoral competition and party system dynamics, particularly in the case of multilevel systems.
However, this research agenda has been somewhat neglected in favor of studies focusing on the macro/national level that use aggregated data. This discouraging scenario is even more emblematic when it comes to Latin America. While there is a long tradition among American and European scholars in including the subnational level to understand national politics, in the Latin American continent it was only recently, for example, that subnational elections were considered more systematically in party systems’ studies. If the lack of electoral studies that underline subnational politics is evident, the insufficiency of studies that deal with public policies, social movements, or democracy at the local level is even more alarming.
Thus, the Subnational and Multilevel Politics RG intends to shed light on the still subjugated subnational level as well as on the political dynamics that emerge from it. We propose to bring together studies that dialogue with topics on federalism, decentralization, multilevel politics, elections, party systems, local democracy, among other subjects that contribute to grasping the political diversity that exists at this level of government. Research that applies different methodologies, whether quantitative or qualitative, as well as comparative studies between countries, are welcome, provided that the unit of analysis is the subnational level.

Goals
The Subnational and Multilevel Politics Research Group aims at:

– Gathering researchers who study subnational and multilevel politics in Brazil to form a network to carry out research and develop other academic activities to improve this field. Young researchers in early career are particularly welcome as well as researchers who produce comparative research on Brazil AND other countries;
–  Conducting high-quality and innovative research on subnational and multilevel politics in Brazil (or between Brazil AND other countries);
–  Being a pleasant environment to their members, where they can conduct their researches and acquire and share knowledge.

Keywords: Subnational. Multilevel. Politics. Brazil.

Frequency
At first, this Research Group will have at least 1 meeting per month.

Network strategy
This Research Group already has one member:
• Thaís Cavalcante Martins (member of BRaS already).

To gather new members, the head/team of this RG will brainstorm possible names and strategies to approach them.

Expected products
• List of Brazilian and foreign researchers who research subnational politics;
• To submit at least two texts each semester to be published on the BRaS-Blog (the first one for this semester (1/2021), which will be about last Brazil’s municipal elections, is already in the loop);
• To submit funding proposals for publication of books or organization of events, provided that calls are open.
• OBS.: the RG has already an ongoing project, which is the special issue “Subnational Politics: An Emerging Research Agenda” edited by Jayane dos Santos Maia and Thaís Cavalcante Martins that will come out in the journal Agenda Política in 2021/22.

References

Boogers, M. & Voerman, G. (2010) Independent Local Political Parties in the Netherlands. Local Government Studies, 36(1), 75–90.
Deschouwer, K. (2006) Political Parties as Multi-level Organizations. In Handbook of Party Politics,
edited by Richard S. Katz and William Crotty. SAGE Publications, 291-300.
Falleti, T. (2010) Decentralization and Subnational Politics in Latin America. Cambridge University Press.
Gervasoni, C. (2011). Democracia y Autoritarismo en las provincias argentinas: La medición y causas de los regímenes subnacionales. Journal of Democracy an Español, 3, 75–93.
Gibson, E. & Suarez-Cao, J. (2010). Federalized Party Systems and Subnational Party Competition: Theory and an Empirical Application to Argentina. Comparative Politics, 43(1), 21–39.
Jones, M. (1997). Federalism and the Number of Parties in Argentine Congressional Elections. The Journal of Politics, 59(2), 538–549.
Kikuchi, H. & Lodola, G. (2014). The Effects of Gubernatorial Influence and Political Careerism on Senatorial Voting Behavior: The Argentine Case. Journal of Politics in Latin America, 6(2), 73–105. Spoon, J. & West, K. J. (2015). “Alone or Together? How Institutions Affect Party Entry in Presidential Elections in Europe and South America.” Party Politics, 21(3), 393–403.
Suarez-Cao, J. & Freidenberg, F. (2012). Multilevel Party Systems and Democracy, A New Typology of Parties and Party Systems in Latin America. Annual Meeting of the International Political Science Association, Madrid, Spain, 1-36.

Luísa Turbino Torres

Anna Paula Bennech

Research Group’s Outline
This study group is aimed to discuss different issues around feminisms in Latin America, with a special focus on Brazil. Gender Studies in Brazil emerged from popular feminist movements and gain traction in the 1990s. They are interdisciplinary studies that look to comprehend gender as an important category of analysis in Brazilian politics. Nowadays, the trajectory of feminist movements and gender studies are a central part of the research agenda of many interdisciplinary programs and center around the country.
Despite significant recent progress, the current social and political context in Brazil gave way to a reverse wave in gender equality. Today, Brazil is one of the world leaders in femicide and violence against the LGBTQ+ population. Thus, gender studies face many challenges in the country, especially in a context of frequent attacks on democracy that also extends to global contexts. Among them, the advancement of educational and cultural policies from the far-right, which represents not only a setback but also a direct attack on marginalized populations. These policies do not happen in isolation, but rather as a result of a narrative explicitly against the feminist agenda, led by the far-right around the world. The discourse of denial of the existence of “gender”, for example, built through the expression “gender ideology”, was created and diffused mainly by religious groups.
It is also important to highlight that Brazilian feminisms are part of a broader Global South feminisms, which embrace diversity and tensions while also challenging universal premises that reinforce north/south hierarchies. Furthermore, the concept of intersectionality and how different systems of oppression such as class, gender, sexuality, and race, become even more important in a context shaped by the legacies of colonialism, the enslavement of African people, and marginalization and exploitation of indigenous populations. In this sense, it is also a challenge to include decoloniality as praxis, serving as an orienting principle in Global South movements inside and outside academia.

Justification
Despite significant recent regional and global progress, the current social and political context in Brazil allowed the emergence of a reverse wave towards gender equality. Brazil is today one of the world leaders in femicide and violence against the LGBTQ+ population. It is urgent the production of emancipatory knowledge focused on understanding gender oppression in every corner of Brazilian society.

Goals
● Gather early career and experienced researchers from multiple research fields interested in Gender, Sexuality, and/or Family from an intersectional approach with a focus on Brazil as a case study and/or from a comparative approach.
● Organize and develop a research network to foster thematic academic research and multi-stakeholder debates, such as civil society, academia, and industry.
● Encourage and foster networking among researchers from a trans and interdisciplinary approach in a collaborative and democratic environment.

Frequency
The RG GSFIS will hold monthly meetings, starting from July 2021.

Expected products
● Four internal meetings to organize and deliberate about the RG GSFIS’s structure and the
guest talks, as well as discuss specialized literature.
● Three guest talks via Zoom open to the general public (August, October, and December), approaching the following topics: Sexual and Reproductive Rights in Brazil and Argentina; Gender in Politics; and Gender & Religion.
● For each guest talk, one product, i.e. article submission to BRaS-Blog, social media content.

Network strategy
● The RG GSFIS will range from 10 to 12 members.

Application Requirements:
■ Be comfortable with English;
■ Submit a CV and motivation letter (no longer than half a page) stating why you want to join the RG GSFIS and highlighting your specific research interests.
● When choosing guest lecturers, we will encompass at least three countries/regions, i.e. Brazil, the US, and Germany.

Keywords: Gender. Sexuality. Family. Intersectionality.

References

Few-Demo, April L., and Katherine R. Allen. “Gender, Feminist, and Intersectional Perspectives on Families: A Decade in Review.” Journal of Marriage and Family 82, no. 1 (2020): 326–45. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12638.

Scott, Joan W. “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis.” The American Historical Review 91, no. 5 (1986): 1053–75. https://doi.org/10.2307/1864376.

Weldon, S. Laurel. “The Structure of Intersectionality: A Comparative Politics of Gender.” Politics & Gender 2, no. 02 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X06231040.

Flávia de Almeida Montingelli Zanferdini:
Judge, PHD in Law. Master’s degree and Bachelor’s degree Law professor at the university of Ribeirão Preto (UNAERP). Member of the Constitutional Rights Research Group for the Brazilian Research and Studies Center, member of the BRAS-J – Brazilian Research and Studies Journal

Vinícius Alves Scherch 
Ph.D. candidate in Science, Technology, and Society (STS) at the Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar) and a member of BRaS’s Constitutional Studies RG. Master in Legal Science from the State University of Norte do Paraná – UENP (2019). Specialist in Public Administration from Unicesumar (2014), in Labor Law and Process from UNOPAR (2015) and in Contemporary Constitutional Law from IDCC (2018). Graduated in Public Management from UNOPAR (2015) and in Law from Faculdade Cristo Rei (2010). Professor of Law at Universidade Norte do Paraná – UNOPAR. Public Lawyer.

Ticiani Garbellini Barbosa Lima
Lawyer, Master’s degree in Collective Rights and Citizenship

André Pereira César
specialist in political analysis, legislative procedures and functioning of the different areas of the federal executive. With more than twenty years of experience in the sector, André César has an extensive and qualified network of contacts in Brasília. He was a partner at CAC Consultoria Politica and consultant at the Brazilian Institute of Political Studies (IBEP), where he led research on the functioning of the Federal Legislature. More recently, he was Managing Partner at Prospectiva Consultoria in Brasília. Nowadays, he is a partner at Hold Assessoria Legislativa. Bachelor in Sociology and Political Science from Unicamp, with specialization in budget control from the School of Finance Administration of the Ministry of Finance (DF). He was a member of the São Paulo School of Government.

Luana Cristina Falavigna
Postgraduate in Social Security Law at the Escola Brasileira de Direito (EBRADI). Bachelor of Law at the Faculdades Integradas de Jaú (FIJ). Lawyer in the private sphere, working in civil, social security, labor and business areas.

Marcela Eduarda Farias Rech
graduated in Chemistry from the Institute of Education Science and Technology of the State of São Paulo (IFSP) and student of pedagogy at the Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar) – São Carlos (SP). Participated in the extension projects “The Science of the 1988 Federal Constitution: Reading the Federal Constitution in its entirety”, offered by UFSCar and in the “Monitor Training Course”, also at UFSCar in partnership with the Brazilian Research and Studies Center (BRaS).

Considering the idea that a constitution is a Political Charter, the need for recovering its political-normative sense is evident.

Constitutional restrictions, violations, and misinterpretations – the reelection amendment, electoral threshold designated as the reserve of possible and the subsequent ones resulting in 2020 – are interpreted herein as constitutional misinterpretations and misaligned with the scope and principle of constitutional unity; see the principle of non-regression (social) and human dignity guarantee.

Those constitutional violations can be a coup against the constitution (Bonavides 2009) or a constitutional transmutation. Constitutional core fights to be a Political Charter, i.e., not suspending political rights to include legitimated individuals and collectives in mechanisms of constitutional review, because “for assuring the Constitution’s supremacy, one must sieve through and control legal acts in order to identify the invalid ones – for colliding with the Constitution” (Ferreira Filho 2009, 21).

The research is justified by the CF88 affirmation and reveals institutional crimes committed “on its behalf”. The simplest method of demonstration and evaluation has proven to be efficient: excerpts from articles of the CF88, reaffirming its connotation as a Political Charter, followed by a summary of the social and political reality, especially after 2016.

With this comparison between a Constitutional Nomology (major premise) and a social synthesis, one can see that it is not a constitutional issue, but rather of public authority tending to – under a national Fascism (Necrofascism) — destroy guarantees, rights, and liberties enforced by the CF88.

If the Executive’s excess of competencies may be criticized – in reference to the Kaiserpresident (Weber 1985) –, we need to examine some points: 1) the CF88 largely attributed autonomy and competence to the Legislative and Judiciary Branches; 2) undoubtedly, to reduce the executive powers, we would have to stabilize more autonomy among the political entities; 3) What would have happened to the country if by 2020 we had a deeper and greater rooting of Caudillismo and the so-called “local authorities”?; 4) any proposal for a constitutional amendment, suggested in the midst and carrying the 2016-2021 National Fascism, has no public interest at its core.

The objectives are the following:

• Discuss intangible heritage – culture, biodiversity of all ecosystems nationwide, and social and political plurality –, as diffuse rights threatened by the failure to protect the CF88.
• Look into the contributions of the CF88 and its alignment with social control, in the decision-making processes involving environmental defense and protection.
• Debate aspect of the agribusiness and family farming, advances and setbacks in land reform and concentration.
• Verify if, today, the indigenous people’s rights are respected as required by the CF88
• Present the idea of the Political Charter.

Periodicity

[At least 1 meeting every 2 months]

Network strategy

 

The research group’s strategy is based on the contrast between legal and political aspects involving the CF88. We will seek the construction of ideas and analysis, oriented by conceptual and scientific literature review as well as the observation of post-2016 social, cultural, and political phenomena.

Keywords: Political Charter. Public Participation. Disruptive Power.

References

 

Bonavides, Paulo. 2002. Curso de Direito Constitucional. São Paulo: Malheiros.

Bonavides, Paulo. 2003. Teoria do Estado. São Paulo: Malheiros Editores.

Bonavides, Paulo. 2004. Do Estado Liberal ao Estado Social. São Paulo: Malheiros.

Bonavides, Paulo. 2009. Do país constitucional ao país neocolonial: a derrubada da Constituição e a recolonização pelo golpe de Estado institucional. São Paulo: Malheiros.

Borja, Rodrigo. 1998. Enciclopedia de la Politica. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Brasil. 1988. Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil of 1988. Brasília: Federal Official Gazette, October 5, 1988.

Damatta, Roberto. 1983. Carnavais, Malandros e Heróis: para uma sociologia do dilema brasileiro. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar Editores.

Damatta, Roberto. 1985. A casa e a rua: espaço, cidadania, mulher e morte no Brasil. São Paulo: Brasiliense.

Damatta, Roberto. 2000.O que faz o brasil, Brasil? Rio de Janeiro: Rocco.

Ferreira Filho, Manoel Gonçalves. 2009. Princípios Fundamentais do Direito Constitucional. São Paulo: Saraiva.

Filho, Roberto Lyra. 2002. O que é direito. São Paulo: Brasiliense.

Ramos, Graciliano. 2003. Vidas Secas. Rio de Janeiro: Record.

Gramsci, Antonio. 2000. Cadernos do Cárcere. Edited and translated by Carlos Nelson Coutinho. Vol. 2. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira.

Lobato, Monteiro. 2019. Cidades mortas e outros contos. Jandira: Ciranda Cultural.

Assis, Machado de. 1994. A sereníssima República e outros contos. São Paulo: FTD.

Assis, Machado de. 2014. O alienista. São Paulo: Penguin Classics Companhia das Letras.

Martinez, Vinício Carrilho. 2019. “O CONCEITO DE CARTA POLÍTICA NA CF/88: freios político-jurídicos ao Estado de não-Direito.” Post-doc. diss. in Law. Universidade Estadual do Norte do Paraná (UENP).

Medina, José Miguel Garcia. 2014. Constituição Federal Comentada. São Paulo: Editora RT.

Mészáros, István. 2015. A Montanha que devemos conquistar: reflexões acerca do Estado. São Paulo: Boitempo.

Silva, José Afonso da. 2016. Curso de direito constitucional positivo. São Paulo: Malheiros Editores.

Shakespeare, William. 2004. “Hamlet, príncipe da Dinamarca”. Translated by Ana Amélia de Queiroz Carneiro Mendonça. In: BLOOM, H. Hamlet: poema ilimitado, Harold Bloom. Translated by José Roberto O’Shea, 140-319. Rio de Janeiro: Objetiva.

Weber, Max. 1985. “Textos selecionados” In Os Pensadores. São Paulo: Abril Cultural.