In 1985, Michael E. Conroy organized a collaborative research project with the joint participation of the Office of Public Sector Studies in the Institute of Latin American Studies at the University of Texas at Austin and the Instituto Nicaragüense de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales (INIES) in Managua. This innovative project brought a team of U.S. social scientists to Nicaragua to conduct research on the public sector which was emerging under the Sandinista government. In contrast with more conventional research projects, these scholars agreed to provide methodological training for their associates at INIES, and to serve as informal consultants on the policy issues they explored. Although Conroy was the only participant with research experience in Nicaragua and the team’s field research period was quite brief (30 to 45 days), several contributors had extensive experience studying public sector activities in other Latin American countries, and they were able to bring comparative insights and concepts to the analysis.
The final product contains seven “microstudies” of different segments of the public sector. Lawrence S. Graham provided an overview of the emerging state apparatus, concentrating on the dramatically expanded public education system. Increased regional decentralization of administration and public sector spending was explored by Patricia A. Wilson. Michael E. Conroy and Rolf Pendall analyzed the impact of this decentralization on slowing the pace of migration to Managua. A broad overview of the problems with food production and distribution was contributed by María Verónica Frenkel. Alfred H. Saulniers focused more narrowly on the infrastructure and purchasing/distribution activities of the state’s basic grains marketing agency, the Empresa Nicaragüense de Alimentos Básicos (ENABAS). Chandler Stolp drafted a general paper on the criteria and methodology for evaluating the performance of health centers, with some brief reference to the Nicaraguan case. A richly textured comparison of labor participation and mobilization in state- and privately owned sugar mills was contributed by Scott Whiteford and Terry Hoops.
The result is an uneven book, in which some chapters focus on public sector activities (such as education), others on a general problem (such as food production or labor mobilization), and others on evaluatory methodology (such as data analysis of health center efficiency). In spite of this shortcoming, Conroy’s collection is an important and innovative work. It is one of the few empirical studies on the Nicaraguan Revolution, and virtually the only book that looks carefully at the complex process of building a revolutionary public sector in Nicaragua.
The array of studies allows the editor to conclude that the “Nicaraguan ‘public service model’ is clearly different from any previous model’’ (p. 11). The contributors found the most exceptional element in the model to be the high level of popular participation and involvement of mass organizations in the planning and delivery of state services. In spite of the pressures and problems faced by the Sandinista government, the public sector is open to mass involvement and continued innovation. The unique character of the Nicaraguan public sector makes Conroy’s collection a particularly valuable work.
