
🔍 Research Focus
This paper examines the evolution of the institutional presidency — the cluster of agencies that directly support the chief executive — in Argentina and Brazil since redemocratization in the 1980s. The central question is what explains changes in the size of the institutional presidency and the types of agencies that compose it.
📚 Comparative Evidence and Approach
A comparative historical analysis of presidencies in both countries is used to trace institutional change over time. Argentina is treated as a typical case of coalitional presidentialism and Brazil as a typical case of single-party presidentialism, allowing a contrast of how different party and cabinet structures shape presidential organization.
🧭 Key Theoretical Argument
📈 Main Findings
⚖️ Why It Matters
These findings show that institutional design of the presidency is not purely administrative but dynamically responsive to domestic political constraints. Incorporating government type into studies of executive institutions broadens understanding of how presidents build capacity and manage political relationships across different presidential systems.

| The Institutional Presidency from a Comparative Perspective: Argentina and Brazil Since the 1980s was authored by Magna Inácio and Mariana Llanos. It was published by in BPSR in 2015. |
