ABSTRACT:
In a world experiencing multiple crises, the discussion regarding universal parameters and social protection systems becomes increasingly relevant. The notion of polycrises has been associated with a predominance of risks, challenges, and uncertainties (Dan-Cohen, 2019) that operate across various spatial, temporal, and intensity scales (Henig & Knight, 2023), featuring a strong intersectional component. However, since these crises affect distinct territories unequally, it is necessary to examine the capacity of universal systems to address such heterogeneity. This study analyzes the Brazilian case, which is the origin of an important theoretical theoretical foundation for the concept of territory (Santos, 1999), and which also has established universal health, social assistance, and education systems. Through a comparative perspective of institutional designs found in federal legislation, this analysis explores possibilities for the territorial management of social policies, particularly in primary health care, basic social protection, and basic education. Findings indicate that, despite existing regulations and legal mechanisms, these approaches remain distinct and disconnected, leading practices to reproduce sectoral designs. Furthermore, strong federal influence in policy induction often conflicts with territorial heterogeneity and its specific local demands. Within the management sphere, the neoliberal dispute over the State, which promotes divestment and the introduction of private partnerships and managerialist logics (Newman & Clarke, 2012), presents a significant barrier. This affects not only work processes but also the inherently participatory character of social policies and service management in Brazil. Nevertheless, successful experiences led by social movements need to be mentioned, such as the Bairro Educador [Educational neighbourhood] in Heliópolis, São Paulo, fostered by UNAS (Santos, 2024), which address public policy challenges with the principles of popular education.