International development cooperation as one of the triggers for the process of public policy transfer 1

On the one hand, transfer is a process by which governments intentionally use ideas about how policies in other countries work to design or redesign their own public policies (Dussauge, 2012). On the other hand, cooperation is a process that recognizes the existence of an interdependence between states and the international arena. This article aims to discuss and clarify the relation between international cooperation and policy transfer. Drawing on the analysis of development cooperation in Brazil and Chile, we discuss how technical cooperation agreements between these countries and third parties, encourage the transfer of public policies, in particular of those considered as models in the area of social policy, namely Bolsa Família and Chile Solidario. This article demonstrates that international development cooperation facilitates the existence of processes that allow for the transfer of specific components of social policies to other context. The analysis is based on a literature review and on information gathered through interviews conducted with relevant actors.


Introduction
This paper aims to discuss the relation between international cooperation and policy transfer in the context of a policy diffusion process. On the one hand, transfer is understood as a process by which governments intentionally use ideas regarding the functioning of existing policies in other countries for the design or redesign of their own public policies (DUS-SAUGE, 2012). On the other hand, cooperation is a process that recognizes the existence of an interdependence between states and the international arena, this means that there would be mutual and reciprocal dependence between the various actors, where the actions of some would affect the political-economic conditions of others (KEOHANE;NYE, 1977).
The links between cooperation and policy transfer have already been discussed (CONSTANTINE;SHANKLAND, 2017;STONE, 1999) and the literature on the circulation of ideas has debated this topic both theoretically and empirically. However, and in spite of the recent advances, we believe that the relation between cooperation and policy transfer deserves more attention. To begin with, studies often mention cooperation as a type of transfer, but offer no explanation on how to proceed with the empirical application of the concepts, that is how to recognize the specific characteristics of each one.
There is still something of a "missing middle" between the micro (in-country) and macro (geopolitical) levels, since there is as yet little research that has used a diffusion or transfer lens to analyse the role played in less coercive forms of transfer by the international-level institutional and policy architecture of development cooperation itself (CONSTANTINE; SHANKLAND, 2017, p. 101).
Furthermore, we argue that the discussion concerning the actors involved in a cooperation process can be enriched identifying the diverse range of actors and instances where they interact. Lastly, we expect to contribute to the debates by focusing on Latin-American countries, where "the phenomenon of 'voluntary' policy transfer (…) under the rubric of South-South Cooperation (SSC) has received far less attention, despite its long history and growing importance" (CONSTANTINE; SHANKLA-ND, 2017, p. 100). Finally, as Stone, Porto de Oliveira and Pal (2019) argue: [b]y analysing development cooperation and policy transfer together, new mechanisms operating within these processes can be seen. Policies need inevitably to be translated to adapt to such contexts, informal cooperation is often displayed among countries, and there can be different forms of resistance such as peasants fighting against agricultural technology transfers." (STONE; OLIVEIRA; PAL, 2019, p. 13).
Considering the former, our research question is: what is the contribution of international cooperation to policy transfer? We argue that cooperation is one of the channels through which policy transfer might occur. In that sense, the existence of cooperation between states allows the circulation of information, policy makers and models of public policies, creating an environment that enables transfer to occur. In addition, cooperation agreements indicate specific actions and activities, thus contributing directly to policy transfer.
In order to illustrate our views, we analyze Brazilian and Chilean cooperation in the area of cash transfers between 2002 and 2015, a period that encompasses the creation and implementation of Chile Solidario (CHS) and Bolsa Familia (BF) programs 5 . These cases were chosen because both countries have recently developed policies that are considered to be best practices and, thus, have attracted international attention 6 . The Chilean and Brazilian programs are relevant in terms of their components and in what concerns the presence of cooperation and social development agencies.
The information on the cases was gathered through the analysis of the research produced on the topic and of official documents. Additionally, a total of 34 semi-structured interviews were conducted between October 2015 and October 2018, with academics, bureaucrats, and international organizations' representatives. These individuals were selected because of their involvement with the Brazilian and the Chilean programs and/or because of their participation in cooperation strategies developed within the field of social policies involving Chile and/or Brazil. The interviews were conducted in person in different sights -Chile (2016 to 2018), Brazil (2015 to 2017), Paraguay (2018), Colombia (2018) and Guatemala (2018). When the contact in person was not possible, the interviews were 5. In Brazil, cash transfer programs have been implemented at the local level since 1995 and the first national program dates from 2001. However, we will focus only on BF program, which is why we are considering this specific period of time in our analysis.
6. Another relevant case of social policy exported to other countries is the Mexican program Progresa/Oportunidades/Prospera (BANEGAS-GONZÁLEZ; MORA-SALAS, 2012;PECK;THEODORE, 2015;VALENCIA, 2008). However, for this study we have decided to focus on two cases since a reduced number allows us to do a more detailed study and also because these two programs have different designs, whereas there is a greater similarity between the Mexican and the Brazilian programs.
conducted via Skype. The goal was to clarify some of the information that was already provided by other sources and to collect additional information.
The article is divided in three sections. In the first part we critically review the literature on policy transfer and cooperation. Secondly, we analyze Brazilian and Chilean cooperation related to cash transfers. The final section is dedicated to the discussion of the relation between cooperation and policy transfer, considering the evidence of the cases.

Transfer and cooperation
A first step to discuss policy transfer and cooperation is to clarify what we understand by the two concepts. Firstly, it is important to mention that the study of policy transfer is part of a growing body of literature on the circulation of ideas and policy models. An increasing awareness of the interconnection between different units and of the impact of external influences in the development of policies has led to a recent growing interest for these topics, producing important theoretical and empirical studies (for example, MARSH, 1996MARSH, , 2000DUSSAUGE, 2012;EVANS;DAVIES, 1999;LEVI-FAUR, 2005;STONE, 1999;SUGIYAMA, 2011;PORTO DE OLIVEIRA;FARIA, 2017).
It is important to distinguish between the main streams in the literature. Porto de Oliveira and Faria (2017, p. 13) suggest to differentiate along these lines: [p]olicy transfer deals with rather restricted processes involving a few political units and their interactions, while policy diffusion is seen as a process that encompass several states, eventually from distinct continents. Policy circulation is a term that has been employed to frame rather diffuse and multidirectional processes, as we will see ahead.
Diffusion is a process "by which the adoption of innovation by member(s) of a social system is communicated through certain channels and over time, and activates mechanisms that increase the likelihood of adoption by other members who have not yet adopted it" (LEVI-FAUR, 2005, p. 23). It is also relevant to highlight that the dissemination of an idea or policy in a diffusion process is an uncoordinated process, when compared to transfer. Thus, countries would not act completely independently or in a coordinated manner, but in an uncoordinated interdependence (ELKINS; SIMMONS, 2005).
The term policy transfer was coined by Dolowitz and Marsh (2000) who define it as the "process by which knowledge about policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas of a political system (past or present) is used in the development of policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in another political system" (DOLOWITZ; MARSH, 2000, p. 5). Transfer is also, understood as a process by which "governments intentionally use ideas / lessons about the functioning of existing policies and institutions in other countries to inform the (re) design / implementation of their own public policies" (DUSSAUGE; 2012, p. 52). The policy transfer approach distinguishes between voluntary, negotiated and coercive forms of transfer and tries to determine what is transferred, who is involved and under what conditions it is developed (BENDER; KELLER;WILLING, 2014). In that sense, the literature identifies diverse mechanisms of transfer such as emulation, mixture, harmonization, hybridization, assemblage, between others (BENDER; KELLER;WILLING, 2014;MARSH, 2000;PRINCE, 2010).
According to Bennett (1997) and Stone (2001), the processes of adopting a policy, or part of it, are attributable to transfer only if this process is not the product of internal idiosyncratic factors; if during the adoption the responsible politicians are aware of the adoption of the policy or part of it in other places and if external experiences were used for the domestic debate. Finally, Jules (2015) affirms that another type of transfer is the cooperative policy transfer. This concept highlights the interest of one actor to transfer a policy among other units (MAVROT, 2017). In addition, this author affirms that the policy transfer processes should not just be viewed as unilateral movements between two units "and can be truly polycentric in nature" (MAVROT, 2017, p. 121).
The actors who take part in the processes are a key aspect that has not been taken into account when studying policy transfer. As Dolowitz, Plugaru and Saurugger (2019, p. 4) affirm, "actors make transfer possible". Actors are those who carry out relevant actions and who intervene at some stage of the public policy process (DENTE; SUBIRATS, 2014). According to Stone (2001) in the transfer literature, the usual response to the question "who transfers the policy" is "governments", privileging the official actors as bureaucrats, politicians and agencies. However, Dolowitz and Marsh (1996) list a number of actors who might play a role in transfer that goes beyond the former -i.e.: elected officials, bureaucrats, political parties, pressure groups, policy entrepreneurs/experts and supranational institutions. In addition, it is important to consider the role of other actors, such as academics, epistemic communities and think tanks. All of them are significant for their role in the production, dissemination and legitimization of knowledge and ideas which can contribute to the design of policies or for their diffusion.
As there are several types of actors, it is relevant to distinguish the different roles that they play and the channels through which they act. Evans and Davies (1999) affirm that non-state actors participate in the soft transfer of ideas that influences the public agenda; while, stakeholders are involved in hard transfer of practices that require formal decisions (STONE, 2001). Dolowitz, Plugaru and Saurugger (2019) indicate that power relations can be modified by national actors, reorienting the intended goal of a transfer. That is to say that "(…) even when actors appear to be subservient to the international, they can be in a position to change power relations, even to the point of deviating the course of the transfer process in order to frame it in accordance to their needs" (DOLOWITZ; PLUGARU; SAURUGGER, 2019, p. 6). In addition, "policy transfer generally involves a range of tactics on the part of the policy makers to make extralocal policy programmes applicable in local circumstances" (PRINCE, 2010, p. 171). Therefore, the identification of the key actor in each process of transfer is relevant to the understanding of its micro dynamics. Furthermore, actors might use different channels to exert their influence and to operate transfer processes. We argue that cooperation is one of the channels that they may use. Cooperation can be understood as a process that recognizes the existence of an interdependence between states and the international arena, meaning that there would be mutual and reciprocal dependence between the various actors, where the action of some would affect the political-economic conditions of others (KEO-HANE;NYE, 1977). It can be seen as a relationship between partners trying to combine a set of actions and criteria to achieve common objectives at the international level. Such processes might involve actors such as states, supranational organizations, international organizations, national organizations, institutions, non-governmental organizations and individuals (SABAT, 2008).
Cooperation can occur within different frames 7 (CONSTANTINE AND SHANKLAND, 2017; ACGI, 2017; INSTITUTO CAMÕES, N/D). Bilateral cooperation is carried out between two countries that follow patterns and behavioral guidelines defined jointly and it is generally established within a governmental sphere and through formal channels. Triangular cooperation takes place when two or more countries or a multilateral organization join efforts to share experiences, knowledge and resources, according to their comparative advantages, for the benefit of a third country or group of countries. Finally, multilateral cooperation is carried out through schemes, programs and projects whose bases and guidelines are accepted by a group of countries within the framework of an international forum or agreement.
Historically, international cooperation is characterized by the preponderance of North/South relations, but new players from the South are becoming more and more active. This has led to the rise of a brandnew form of cooperation in which Southern countries are the main players. South-South cooperation is defined by the United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation (N/D) as [a] broad framework for collaboration among countries of the South in the political, economic and technical domains, it can take place on a bilateral, regional, sub regional or interregional basis. Developing countries shared knowledge, skills, expertise and resources to meet their development goals through concerted efforts.
Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, India and China are some of the countries that have actively engaged in cooperation. The strategies employed by these countries differ greatly, but there are some common ideas. First, there is no coercion, since cooperation between Southern countries is considered to be more horizontal. Secondly, cooperation projects are generally based on experiences that have been implemented domestically (CONSTANTINE; SHANKLAND, 2017). Finally, Constantine and Shankland (2017) draw attention to the fact that experience and learning are becoming increasingly appreciated.
Complementing these ideas, Stone, Oliveira and Pal (2019) argue that is relevant to focus on the particularities of transfer in developing countries: government structures will be different, donors and international organisations often have the whip hand; and 'aid' is itself a specific type of policy transfer with its own agencies, networks, and professional knowledge. There are also unique circumstances around the credibility of knowledge in a development context, credibility that goes beyond mere technical expertise (STONE; OLIVEIRA; PAL 2019, p. 13).
7. There are other forms of cooperation that we do not examine in this article.
The previous discussion clarifies the definitions involved in this work and their limitations. Transfer and cooperation are different phenomena, with some common components. As we present in Table 1, transfer is process that implies the mobilization of knowledge (from a model to an idea) whereas cooperation implies a relationship and interdependence that could or not implicated that mobilization. Regarding the degree of autonomy, a transfer process could be voluntary, coercive or mixed. In the case of cooperation, willfulness is a key feature of the process. In addition, the instruments are diverse. Transfer can occur by the mechanism of emulation, mixture, learning, assemblage, between others. Cooperation agreements (bilateral, triangular or multilateral) are an example of the instruments that can be used to operate. Finally, in what concerns the actors, there is an overlap between those involved in cooperation agreements and those who can be identified as agents of transfer.
We will consider the components presented here for analyzing the Chilean and Brazilian cases in the next section. Process by which knowledge about policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas of a political system (past or present) is used in the development of policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in another political system. (Dolowitz and Marsh, 2000: 5) Process that recognizes the existence of an interdependence between States and the international arena, this means that there would be mutual and reciprocal dependence between the various actors. (Keohane and Nye, 1977 Dolowitz and Marsh, 2000, Prince, 2010, Bender, Keller and Willing, 2014and Keohane and Nye, 1977 Brazilian and Chilean international cooperation on social development

Brazilian and Chilean Conditional Cash Transfer Programs
Created in 2003 8 , Bolsa Família (BF) gained considerable attention, especially after being classified as a best practice by international organizations and financial institutions, such as the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the World Bank (WB). In order to tackle poverty, BF has two components: (1) an unconditional cash transfer directed at families in extreme poverty that is attributed regardless of its composition; and (2) a conditional cash transfer (CCT) that is awarded to families with children that fall below the poverty line. This latter transfer requires beneficiaries to comply with conditionalities regarding immunization, health care and education of children (OLIVEIRA, 2018).
Chile has implemented a series of measures in the field of social development that have been considered best practices and, therefore, have received international attention. Chile Solidario (CHS) and Puente are two of those initiatives. CHS and Puente -its entry program -began in 2002 and aims to promote the integration of families living in extreme poverty into the social networks of the State and their access to better living conditions. One of the most innovative components of CHS, was the psychosocial support given to the beneficiary families, which consisted of a personalized accompaniment by a professional or qualified technician, in order to (1) promote the development of the necessary personal and family skills to meet the 53 minimum thresholds required by the program; and to (2) link beneficiaries to local networks and benefits. The accompaniment was carried out for 24 months and consists of a system of regular work sessions with families or people at home (OSORIO, 2018).

Brazilian cooperation on social development
Brazil has been involved with South-South cooperation since the 60s but became an important player at the turn of the century. It has moved from a position where it used to import policies to become an actor known for exporting its domestic policies (FARIA, 2012). During Lula's government (2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010), Brazil has enacted several policies that have led to an exceptional reduction of poverty and inequalities and have attracted international attention. Over this period, social development became a key aspect of Brazilian international cooperation, reflecting a growing importance of this policy sector also domestically. Lula's direct involvement in the fight against hunger and poverty was also quite important in garnering support for the program both domestically and internationally. Lula acted as an "international ambassador" strategies. Because of their expertise in dealing with specific issues, Brazilian ministries are able to sign agreements with other countries. MDS is thus responsible for providing international cooperation related to BF 9 . MDS provides technical cooperation and exchanges knowledge and information regarding its activities, mainly through the reception/sending of international delegations, participation in seminars and workshops, and production of information and materials on BF (LEITE, SUYAMA; POMEROY, 2013; LORENZO, 2013). Bureaucrats directly involved with the program were responsible for providing related information to other countries (interviews).
Cooperation provided by the ministry is demand-driven (PAPI; MEDEIROS, 2015), which means that countries that are interested in the establishment of cooperation agreements should request MDS to do so. More than 60 countries have shown interest in cooperating with the ministry (LORENZO, 2013) and agreements have been signed with several countries 10 . There seems to be a preference for the signature of cooperation agreements involving a third party -a feature also present in other Brazilian institutions (ANDRADE, 2008) -such as the WB, FAO, the British Department for International Development (DFID), and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) (CAIXETA; SUYAMA, 2015; MDSA, N/D). Latin America is thus the prime destination of cooperation, with more than 50% of the activities directed at it, followed by Africa (PAPI; MEDEIROS, 2015). Among the specific demands for cooperation, we can identify the following topics: targeting mechanisms, payment systems, implementation and monitoring of conditionalities, information systems (Single Registry) and information related to BF and to the Program for the Eradication of Child Labor (PETI) (LORENZO, 2013; PAPI; MEDEIROS, 2015; interviews).
The Ministry has enacted several cooperation projects in the field of cash transfers. An agreement was signed with Peru to exchange on monitoring and evaluation of conditionalities and to provide technical cooperation aiming at strengthening the Peruvian program Juntos and helping rethink the decentralized management of the program (ABC, 2007; MDSA, N/D). An agreement of cooperation in the field of cash transfers and the fight against extreme poverty was signed between Brazil and Chile (MDSA, N/D). Agreements that focus on cash transfers were also established between Brazil and Ecuador, Bolivia, Cuba, El Salvador, and Guatemala (MDSA, N/D).
African countries have showed particular interest in learning more about BF. Both South Africa and Mozambique, for instance, have looked at BF in order to rethink their own programs 11 (interviews; OLIVEIRA, 2012OLIVEIRA, , 2018. The year 2006 saw the start of the Brazil-Africa Cooperation Program on Social Development, involving Brazil's MDS, the British Department for International Development (DFID), and delegations from Ghana, Mozambique, South Africa, Guinea Bissau, Nigeria and Zambia. This initiative was funded by DFID and had the following goals: (1) facilitate the exchange of technical personnel; (2) foster technical assistance; and (3) the creation of an information platform (ANDRADE, 2008).
In 2007, following a first contact between the two countries in the context of the Brazil-Africa Cooperation Program on Social 9. Within the ministry, the National Secretary for Citizenship Income (Secretaria Nacional de Renda de Cidadania -SENARC) was responsible for overseeing the program and thus several of its members have been involved in cooperation projects. However, the international projects were coordinated by the Department for International Projects.
A cooperation project between the Ministry and the city of New York was also signed (ABC, 2007).
11. In the case of South Africa, study tours took place in Brazil, Chile, and in other Latin American countries in order to assess the possibility of adding conditionalities to their own program (OLIVEIRA, 2018).
Development, Ghana asked the Brazilian MDS to help in the elaboration of a cash transfer program. A cooperation agreement between these countries and DFID was signed later in that very year. Brazil has understood this agreement as a good opportunity to disseminate BF, as well as a possibility to learn about the implementation of cash transfers in a different context (SOUZA, 2007). Ghana, in its turn, has seen it as a way of getting access to technical knowledge on cash transfers and at the same time legitimize its own program (SOUZA, 2007 , 2012). A monthly cash transfer is attributed to families that are part of the Single Registry, an information system similar to its Brazilian counterpart. The program has two branches: an unconditional one that targets elderly people (ABEBRESE, 2011), and a second one that involves conditionalities and that is directed at families with children. In order to receive payment, families with children by their composition are expected to comply with the following conditionalities: (1) children must be enrolled in school and attend classes; (2) all family members should be part of Ghana's National Health Insurance Scheme; (3) children up to 18 months must attend regular medical checkups and follow the immunization calendar; (4) every form of child labor is forbidden (ABEBRESE, 2011; GARCIA; MOORE, 2012; IPC, N/ Da). However, there is an incapacity for monitoring compliance with conditionalities (GARCIA; MOORE, 2012). Grebe (2015, p. 27) states that "while Brazilian consultants did participate in the design of LEAP -and it shares certain characteristics such as the conditionalities attached to the cash grants -the claim of it being an attempt to emulate Bolsa Família within the Ghanaian context is belied by its relatively small scale and low benefit levels". Conditionalities are not a typical feature of programs within the region (OLIVEIRA, 2013), thus one might argue that they are a result of the Brazilian influence. Also, the fact that the information system is called Single Registry and shares similarities to the Brazilian system points to the existence of a transfer process. Foli et al. (2018) and Oliveira (2015) also acknowledge LEAP to be highly influenced by Brazil's BF.

Chilean cooperation on social development
Chile pays particular attention to South-South cooperation. The interaction with the countries in Latin America and the Caribbean and with other developing countries is guided by four key components: (1) the promotion, management and implementation of the capacity of Chilean cooperation in other countries; (2) agreements focus on the demands of third countries for Chilean experiences; (3) the goal is to strengthen the capacity of professionals specialized in international cooperation management and, in addition, to contribute to the discussion on a South-South intra-regional cooperation strategy and on a common framework of cooperation; (4) the relations established should be horizontal and unconditional (VAN KLAVEREN, 2011).
The country often provides "triangular cooperation". Chile has approximately 14 triangular partners with priority areas of cooperation: institutional strengthening and modernization; social development; economic cooperation for development; environment, natural resources and energy; agriculture and food security; territorial and local development; disaster prevention and human resources training (AGCI, 2017;interviews).
The Agency of International Cooperation (AGCI), created in 1990, is one of the main agencies responsible for coordinating international cooperation resources and carry out cooperation actions with developing countries. Since 2005, AGCI has been part of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and therefore their activities are more related to national foreign policy priorities. During the period 2006-2009, the AGCI defined a group of priority countries for South-South cooperation actions. Selected countries included Bolivia, Paraguay, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic and Haiti (FUENTES, 2014;ROJAS, 2011;VAN KLAVEREN, 2011).
CHS's components, particularly the psychological support, were replicated by other countries such as Paraguay, Colombia, Guatemala, Panama and other Central American countries 12 (VALENCIA, 2008). Based on the knowledge and experience accumulated with CHS and Puente, collaboration, cooperation and advocacy methods were established facilitating the influence of Chilean programs in the region.
In Paraguay, the Tekoporã 13 program is aimed at families living in extreme poverty in rural areas of the country. The program began in 2005 and has conditionalities related to health and education and, similar to what happens in CHS, the program incorporated "family guides" that accompany the families and provide psychosocial support services (FON-SECA, 2008). The program was supported by WB and IADB, as well as technical support in the design and implementation by countries such as Mexico, Brazil, Colombia (BATTILANA, 2015; VERA SOARES; BRIT-TO, 2007) and Chile through AGCI (AGCI, 2013).
Between 2011 and 2014, a project called "Paraguay Among All. Strengthening the Social Policy Strategy" was developed which consisted of cooperation between Paraguay, Chile, Australia and Germany, seeking to develop a national strategy to improve Paraguayan social policies and This initiative was created to respond to high levels of poverty and malnutrition, and to low levels of education and access to healthcare facilities among the rural population (CECCHINI et al., 2009). Thus, the program seeks to improve, the living conditions of families in extreme poverty through economic support, so that they can invest in health, education and food 14 .
In Colombia, Familias en Acción (created in 2000) targets families with members under 18 who experience situations of poverty and vulnerability. However, it was not until 2007 that the Social Protection Network for Overcoming Poverty (JUNTOS) was created based on the Chilean experience of Puente. JUNTOS is composed of two operating strategies -the first corresponds to family support, while the second regards the coordination of State entities that intervene in the delivery of different benefits and monitor the compliance with 45 minimum thresholds. The cooperation between Chile and Colombia has occurred through formal and informal channels, since the presence of missions to learn about the Chilean experience was not always linked to the Colombian Ministry of Social Development.
Puente was also enacted in the Caribbean region. share information regarding the theory that informs the programs and practical information; and (2) to interact with those responsible for Puente and with beneficiary families; (B) training workshops; (C) mentoring by Chilean tutors who have expertise with the program; and (D) the adaptation of original Puente materials to enhance learning experiences of Caribbean participants (AGCI and Foundation Henry Dunant, 2014).
As we mentioned, psychological accompaniment is a specific feature of the Chilean program and since the mentioned-above countries have included it in their own programs after signing specific cooperation agreements regarding this topic with Chile (and sometimes with a third party), we can argue that this component was transferred from Chile to new contexts and that cooperation agreements can be understood as an instrument that facilitated the transfer process.

Final Remarks
Cooperation is one of the mechanisms through which the transfer process can occur. In the last section we have analyzed Brazilian and Chilean cooperation in the field of cash transfers. These two case studies have shown that policies -or at least specific elements of them -are adopted by other countries and that this is facilitated by the establishment of cooperation agreements. Indeed, we can clearly identify the replication of Brazil's BF components and Single Registry 15 -the system used to identify families in poverty -in Ghana. Transfer can also be observed in the case of CHS, since its psychological component has been adopted by other countries, such as Paraguay (see Table 2  Both countries have shared knowledge that they have accumulated through the implementation of their own programs. The ministries responsible for providing cooperation are the ones that host the programs and the bureaucrats involved in cooperation agreements are the very same that are involved with the programs back home (interviews). These two countries give strong emphasis to technical cooperation, which confirms the argument of Constantine and Shankland (2017) that knowledge and experience are growing in importance when it comes to developing cooperation projects. The preference for triangular cooperation also illustrates this point, as Brazil and Chile are providing the experience and technical information, whereas funding to enact the projects comes from elsewhere. This is the case of the cooperation agreement signed between Brazil, DFIF and Ghana -the funding to put the project in place came from a traditional donor, but the expertise is provided by Brazilian bureaucrats who are part of Brazil's MDS and who have worked in BF or in related topics and thus have considerable experience in the matter to advise Ghana on how to develop its own program. This is also the case of the triangular cooperation established between Chile, Guatemala and GIZ. The German agency contributed to the dissemination of the program by mobilizing Chilean experts who have knowledge and experience due to their involvement with CHS. Finally, the presence of Puente in the Caribbean is a good example of cooperative policy transfer (JULES, 2015;MAVROT, 2017). Here, it is relevant to highlight the numerous actors involved: transfers are not unilateral movements between two units; they are polycentric. The role played by OAS, linking Chilean experts to a group of countries, is relevant to understand how transfers occur in the frame of cooperation initiatives.
Regarding the actors, when analyzing cooperation processes, it is crucial to pay special attention to governments since they are able to generate the necessary commitments to carry out cooperation agreements, be they bilateral or triangular. In addition, it is necessary to discuss further the role of the experts, who can be "officially" part of a cooperation initiative, but later, can be also convened as an "independent" expert legitimized by the experience obtained as a national policy maker.
As already mentioned, the process of transfer does not occur separately from diffusion process. When we look at Latin American countries, we can identify the presence of an epistemic community that has established a consensus on the importance of cash transfers as a means to tackle poverty (OSORIO, 2018). The activities of this epistemic community have led to the dissemination of programmatic ideas regarding cash transfers and have created room for these initiatives to be implemented in almost all countries in the region. Howlett et al. (2018) study the process of CCT diffusion and the process of implementation of a CCT in the Philippines and identify instrument constituencies -groups similar to epistemic communities that gather around a specific policy instrument -as important actors in the dissemination of information and models. Foli et al. (2018) also identify the existence of a transnational instrument constituency concerned with CCTs and argue that the transfer of components that are present in BF to Ghana was made possible due to its presence.
When specific information on how to operate the program or when information on policy instruments related to the program is needed, a different type of relation between the adopting country and the country of origin has to be established. In other words, transfer is needed. This transfer process can take place through cooperation agreements. The examination of cooperation agreements signed by Chile and Brazil with third parties reveals that the recipient countries present very precise demands on specific topics or instruments. In the case of Brazil, there is an interest for conditionalities, monitoring of conditionalities and the Single Registry. Ghana's government was interested in getting information on all of these topics and LEAP's design reflects the existence of a learning process that has resulted in the adoption of very similar features to the ones of BF, namely the Single Registry and conditionalities (although they are not effectively monitored). However, learning processes made possible by cooperation might not always lead to the transfer of policies, since they can be judged somehow inadequate to the new context. In other words, sometimes learning might result in "negative lessons" (ROSE, 1993). South Africa was interested in learning more about the Brazilian experience of CCTs -it was part of Brazil-Africa Cooperation Program on Social Development and bilateral study tours took place-, but has made a clear decision not to add conditionalities to the unconditional cash transfer program already in place 16 (OLIVEIRA, 2018). Chile, in its turn, is well-known for having innovated when developing the psychological component and this specific characteristic of the program is the object of several cooperation agreements. This can be demonstrated by studying the components present in CCTs in a comparative way. In the case of Chile, the bilateral and triangular cooperation processes led to a scenario that allowed the incorporation of CHS and Puente program components. Particularly when studying the case of Colombia, there was a predominantly formal cooperation process that allowed the exchange of information and experiences, which are reflected in the creation of the Red Together -delivery of social support through managers and the fulfillment of 45 basic thresholds, very similar to Puente's design. On the contrary, in the case of Paraguay, despite the cooperation agreement signed in 2009 with AGCI that installed the Social Protection System in Paraguay, the process of implementing the system has not been completed until today and it is expected to be in operation by the year of 2023 (OSORIO; VERGARA, 2019).
If diffusion results in the spread of ideas and models, transfer allows for the particular elements of the public policy and to policy instruments that are required to implement the programs to circulate. Diffusion, as an uncoordinated process, is related to the circulation of ideas that are considered to be "macro". In other words, it corresponds to the circulation of more general and programmatic ideas and models. International cooperation is often based on the discussion of specific policy instruments. Thus, we argue that diffusion allows for the circulation of programmatic ideas, whereas transfer gives countries the mechanisms to operationalize them. Puente in the Caribbean provides a good example of that. Countries learnt about the Chilean program through a tradi-16. School attendance rates are already very high and therefore the government has understood that adding conditionalities would produce very little result (OLIVEIRA, 2018).
tional activity of exhortation developed by international organizations and members of the epistemic community. Later, Caribbean countries requested more information related to the programs and the cooperation initiative driven by the OAS, with specific tools of transfer of knowledge, was created. The Brazilian and Chilean cases allow us to show that international cooperation can be used as a transfer mechanism. Further research regarding this issue is needed, particularly, in what concerns the detailed discussion of whether transfer implies learning, hybridization, emulation or other denominations proposed by the literature. Additional research could focus, for example, on the role of the diverse actors, the domestic capabilities and the object of transfer, both from a theoretical and methodological perspective. All of them are future questions that emerge from this present work.