Título:	Consultas públicas na Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária : caminhos para democratização da regulação
Outros títulos:	Public consultations in the Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency: paths to democratization of regulation
Autor(es):	Caldeira, Telma Rodrigues
Orientador(es):	Mendonça, Ana Valéria Machado
Assunto:	Consulta pública Politica pública Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA)
Data de publicação:	27-Jun-2025
Data de defesa:	13-Dez-2024
Referência:	CALDEIRA, Telma Rodrigues. Consultas públicas na Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária: caminhos para democratização da regulação. 2024. 237 f. il. Tese (Doutorado em Saúde Coletiva) — Universidade de Brasília, Brasília, 2024.
Abstract:	The Federal Constitution of 1988 instituted community participation as a guideline of the Unified Health System (SUS), which allowed the expansion of democratic spaces, however, it is questioned how popular speech, with its knowledge, is considered in public decision-making. In view of this, a descriptive and exploratory study was built that allowed us to trace the paths of how the various types of knowledge can be used systematically in the health regulation process of the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa), especially those collected by the Public Consultations (PCs), and thus democratize health regulation. In view of the concept of social participation as several actions related to public decision-making with appreciation of diversity and as an exercise of citizenship, it is discussed how the framework of deliberative democracy and the moderate model of evidence can contribute to the improvement of Anvisa's CPs as a means of participation in which a better understanding is sought for a decision-making process informed by evidence, to allow the diversity of manifestations and their equal treatment. The data allowed us to conclude that the institutionalization of procedures to improve regulatory quality from 2008 onwards in internal rules were fundamental to establish standards for deliberative assumptions in CPs. With this, Anvisa's CPs allowed society, academia and the regulated sector to position themselves in regulation. However, there are weaknesses in terms of permeability to contributions, the plurality of arguments (concentrated on scientific evidence), the use of instruments that consider social inequalities, as well as vulnerabilities related to the transparency of the analysis of contributions, justification, and conflicts of interest of the participants. In addition, a certain homogeneity was noted in the institutionalization of PC in Brazilian and international agencies through general rules and guidelines regarding the assumptions of equal participation, deliberative inclusion, deliberative equality, publicity and accountability. The greatest weakness occurred in the category of deliberative inclusion due to the lack of specific procedures to reduce the asymmetry of power, but general recommendations on the use of accessible language. Therefore, it presents an action structure built on the results of the institutionalization of the PCs, whose feasibility requires a structured base, a series of resources and leadership sponsorship. Despite the limitations of the proposal, the framework points out the route for the democratization of health regulation, conferring deliberative elements to the PCs and delimiting the role of evidence in the decision-making process, in order to improve a space for participation so that it is equitable and reduce the abyss between scientific evidence and practical, real-life knowledge, conferring a role of translator of knowledge to Anvisa. In the post-truth era, false equivalence and misinformation are narratives that influence society, therefore, challenging the model of evidence informed democratic regulation. So that, in order for the spaces of participation to be occupied in a qualified manner, it is essential to invest in the education of individuals as a means of propelling citizen political awareness, a powerful ability to democratize the regulation of health risk.
Unidade Acadêmica:	Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde (FS)
Informações adicionais:	Tese (doutorado) — Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Saúde Coletiva, 2024.
Programa de pós-graduação:	Programa de Pós-Graduação em Saúde Coletiva
Aparece nas coleções:	Teses, dissertações e produtos pós-doutorado

Os itens no repositório estão protegidos por copyright, com todos os direitos reservados, salvo quando é indicado o contrário.