This anthology, based on a Universidad Nacional-sponsored seminar, analyzes and critiques recent social and development policy in Colombia, most specifically that of the César Gaviria administration’s so-called “Revolución Pacífica” (1990-94). The 25 papers included in this volume cover virtually every area of social policy. While some writers provide overall critiques of development policy conducted within a 1990s setting of neoliberal economics, others focus on such specific issues as health, education, women, children, community participation, and ethnic minorities. Some essays are quasi-academic in nature and include bibliographies or notes; others amount to brief think pieces.
Some of the authors recognize that since the 1980s, Colombian governments have taken seriously their country’s grave social injustices and inequalities and have wrestled honestly with short- and long-term solutions, usually through official plans of social development, to which each recent administration has given its own slogan; hence Gaviria’s “Revolución Pacífica.” For example, the leadoff piece is a defense of Gaviria’s social policy by Juan Luis Londoño, Gaviria’s health minister and an articulate defender of the social policy of a regime closely associated with neoliberal economics and privatization. A few other “official” spokespersons are also represented. The rest of the volume, however, is given over to professors at the Universidad Nacional as well as other academics, including Orlando-Fals Borda, who seize this opportunity to critique recent social policy. Some of them at least acknowledge that the 1991 Constitution and official government policy publicly and overtly recognize the need to focus the efforts of the state on the popular sectors of society. Other critiques are more harsh and dismissive, finding fault with the aims, direction, and implementation of these social development projects.
These latter analyses of social policy consistently repeat three major criticisms: 1) neoliberal development policy favors economic growth over redistributive policies and deemphasizes major central government expenditures on health, education, and welfare in favor of decentralized regional and local spending; 2) social development administration in Colombia is undervalued, incoherent, poorly planned, overly bureaucratic, and inefficiently managed; and 3) social planning is still too patriarchal and “top-down” and needs to be much more “bottom up,” incorporating genuine popular and community participation in planning and implementation.
What struck this reviewer was the virtual ignoring of the pernicious and distortive impact of the multibillion dollar illegal drug trafficking industry on the social fabric of Colombia. In a similar vein, an issue that could have received fuller treatment is the pervasive and institutionalized domestic violence associated not only with narcotics trafficking, but also with paramilitary groups, armed insurgent movements and, indeed, the army itself.
