Analysis reveals how technocratic democracy and political power influence policy consensus in Chile and Uruguay.
This article examines how elite cohesion in economic policymaking is achieved through different configurations of knowledge and political power. Comparing Chile’s technocratic democracy and Uruguay’s more participatory but less technocratic model, the study analyzes policy networks during the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis, using cohesive blocking analysis and exponential random graph models (ERGMs). The findings reveal that both technocratic expertise and political ties can foster effective policymaking consensus, depending on the institutional context. By challenging the dominant assumption that technocratic networks are uniquely suited to building consensus, this study advances a broader theoretical understanding of how different forms of elite capital contribute to policymaking cohesion in Latin America.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garrido‐Vergara et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: