“Some matches with recent records of questionable management or populist speeches present, paradoxically, government plans with relatively high levels of technical coherence and fiscal viability,” concluded a report by Videnza Instituto on the comparative evaluation of the government plans of the political parties running for the general elections.
“This dissonance highlights a relevant tension for the voter: the formal quality of a plan does not guarantee its responsible implementation or its alignment with the party’s previous political conduct,” he added.
To objectively compare commitments and reduce ideological bias, the consulting firm used a standardized methodology assisted by artificial intelligence (AI). The proposals were evaluated on five axes (economic growth, human capital, citizen security and fight against corruption, socio-environmental development, and governance) and four key criteria: clarity, level of details, feasibility and technical coherence. (You can see the full report at https://videnzainstituto.org/propuestasdelbicentenario/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Evaluacion-planes-de-gobierno-VI.pdf)
Thus, beyond the contradictions between the trajectory of the parties and the coherence of their plans, the results in the economic axis reveal that the greatest discrepancies do not lie in the discourse on growth. That is to say, the importance of this engine to achieve the country’s prosperity is not in question.
However, the differences focus on the technical quality of the proposals, the coherence of the measures with the preservation of the country’s macroeconomic stability and the clarity of the public policies that will be executed.
“When one looks only at economic growth, the best evaluated plans are not those that promise the most, but rather those that best connect macro stability, investment and productivity with viable instruments,” the report states.
According to Videnza, the worst evaluated are characterized by the absence of policies (instruments) compatible with fiscal viability. There are even extremist proposals that propose recipes that did not work in the past.
“In economic growth, several plans promise to change the model, but few explain how to grow without fiscal disorder, inflation or a drop in investment,” the consulting firm says.
The best evaluated
As for those best evaluated in the economic growth axis, the Alliance for Progress (APP) party stands out in first place with 16.5 points. This score is obtained by the clarity of its economic plan, which, as indicated, is based on private investment.
The plan makes repeated use of concepts such as unblocking projects, promoting public-private partnerships without ambiguity. In addition, it maintains the autonomy of the Central Reserve Bank.
However, and although it is not in the report, during the current congressional period, the APP bench shielded the questioned government of Dina Boluarte, which generated a fiscal mess; In addition, he supported a series of populist measures that are part of the institutional deterioration that has prevented the country from growing above rates of 6%.
On the other hand, Avanza País is in second place in terms of economic proposals with a score of 16.5. Surpassed by APP only by a few hundredths. According to Videnza, the plan well identifies the problems that affect growth: uncertainty, low productivity and informality. It proposes a unit of spending quality and regulatory stability. On the other hand, the measures are implementable within the institutional framework.
The third position is for Fuerza Popular. The score of 16.5 in economic matters is because it includes explicit goals. For example, reduce the fiscal deficit to 1% and processing times by 40%. It also proposes realistic financing, such as the use of Works for Taxes, among others. Their proposals do not alter fiscal or monetary rules.
However, in the last five years his legislative management has been questioned for approving pro-crime laws, having supported the Boluarte government and legislating in favor of Reinfo.
For its part, Perú Primero occupies fourth position because, according to the analysis, its message is clear. It proposes clear lines of action, such as industrialization, strengthening of public companies and control of strategic sectors. “The plan is consistent with its own unorthodox conceptual framework,” the report states.
The fifth best ranked is the Purple Party. According to the report, his plan is the most consistent with economic growth because the latter is based on improved productivity, formalization and institutions. Furthermore, it does not pose institutional ruptures. His reforms are within the fiscal and monetary framework.
However, his track record contradicts his proposals. For the 2021 elections, the party promised to achieve macroeconomic stabilization and prioritize fiscal stability. However, Congresswoman Flor Pablo, who came to Parliament with that group, supported a series of populist measures, such as increasing teacher pensions without a budget to support it.
in the queue
In the last places the parties Un Camino Diferente and Renovación Popular compete. The first has proposals that strain the institutional framework. According to Videnza, he proposes profound reforms of the State without a clear route.
The second is characterized by its generality. According to the report, it proposes supporting private companies and maintaining fiscal discipline without goals. Although its proposed policies do not pose ruptures in macroeconomic stability, they are not clear either. Furthermore, his plan has limited financial support. According to the report, growth is seen more as a consequence of the moral than the economic.
Together for Peru and Peru Libre are the parties whose economic proposals are radical and lack support. Both propose changing the economic model. Together for Peru proposes that growth will depend on economic reforms not developed in its plan. It also does not include the cost of its policies.
Perú Libre proposes policies that led us to hyperinflation in the 80s, such as the nationalization of companies and state control. It also does not take into account fiscal sustainability.
“In democracy, informed voting implies not only listening to promises, but also demanding clear explanations about how, with what resources and in what terms the candidates intend to materialize them,” Videnza stressed.
Receive your Perú21 by email or WhatsApp. Subscribe to our enriched digital newspaper. Take advantage of the discounts here.
RECOMMENDED VIDEO
