Democracy on the Edge: Limits and Possibilities in the Implementation of an Urban Reform Agenda in Brazil RAQUEL ROLNIK Abstract The 1990s in Brazil were a time of institutional advances in the areas of housing and urban rights following the signing of the new constitution in 1988 that incorporated the principles of the social function of cities and property, recognition of the right to ownership of informal urban squatters and the direct participation of citizens in urban policy decision processes. These propositions are the pillars of the urban reform agenda which, since the creation of the Ministry of Cities by the Lula government, has come under the federal executive branch. This article evaluates the limitations and opportunities involved in implementing this agenda on the basis of two policies proposed by the ministry — the National Cities Council and the campaign for Participatory Master Plans — focusing the analysis on government organization in the area of urban development in its relationship with the political system and the characteristics of Brazilian democracy. Introduction In Brazil, the 1990s were a period of intense debate by the general public, the political parties and the government on the role of citizens and their organizations in governing cities. In addition, there were institutional advances in the areas of housing and urban rights, including the signing of the new constitution in 1988 with a chapter on urban policies, structured around the concept of the social function of cities and property, recognition of the land rights of millions of inhabitants of shantytowns and informal settlements on the periphery of cities in Brazil, and the direct participation of citizens in urban policy decision-making processes. These have been the main items of the ‘urban reform agenda’ since the 1980s, whose principal proponents are social movements, non-governmental organizations and professional and academic associations, whose purpose is to promote the right to the city (Santos, 2007: 297). It was also at this time that Brazil began to progressively implement decentralization from the federal government, and local government gained more autonomy. This decentralization was, however, limited by macroeconomic adjustments adopted in Brazil in the 1990s and by the high level of political continuity in Brazilian redemocratization, a continuing process (Avritzer, 2003: 572; Alston et al., 2005). In my view, it was the specific and perverse combination of elements presented above, and their relationship with the strong heritage of Brazilian political culture and an excluding predatory governance logic, that dictated the ebb and flow of the urban reform agenda in Brazil. If the latter did not obtain a sufficient political base to allow it to affect government dynamics or the relationship between politicians and the public broadly and deeply enough to promote government reform in the area of urban Volume 35.2 March 2011 239–55 International Journal of Urban and Regional Research DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.01036.x © 2011 The Author. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research © 2011 Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published by Blackwell Publishing. 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA