Cited by 104Politics and Society in Latin AmericaPopulism, Right-Wing MovementsExtractivism and Socioeconomic Issues

Environmental governance under Bolsonaro: dismantling institutions, curtailing participation, delegitimising opposition

Open access
Menezes, Roberto Goulart, Barbosa, Ricardo·2021·Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft

Abstract

Tensions concerning environmental governance have increased in Brazil since the far-right came to power in 2016. We offer insight into this process by analysing the first two years of Jair Bolsonaro's (2019-ongoing) environmental policies-namely, how Brazil's environmental protection arrangements are being dismantled. We find that the Bolsonaro administration centralises environmental governance in Brazil through complementary authoritarian and populist means. First in restricting participatory decision-making spaces such as the National Environmental Council (Conama) and the National Council of the Legal Amazon (CNAL), and, second, by attacking indigenous and traditional peoples, NGOs, scientists, and other environmental defenders. To illustrate the authoritarian dimension of Bolsonaro's environmental governance, we carry out a political-institutional analysis of contemporary Brazilian environmental politics and then exemplify the ways and extent to which attacks against environmental defenders is a constituent part of Bolsonaro's environmental populism. We hold that such attacks are not merely rhetorical but a political tactic to legitimise Bolsonaro's authoritarian environmental governance in the promotion of 'total extractivism' while maintaining a populist appeal.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12286-021-00491-8

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Similar neoclientelist dynamics shape Bolsonaro's Brazil, Fujimori's Peru, and contemporary Serbia, where bureaucratic continuity conceals deep politicization and patronage-driven governance.

    “but similar dynamics shape Bolsonaro's Brazil, Fujimori's Peru, and contemporary Serbia, where bureaucratic continuity conceals deep politicization and patronage- driven governance (Bauer and Becker2020; Peters and Pierre 2022; Menezes and Barbosa 2021; Peci2021; Radeljić and Đorđević2020)”

    From Authoritarian Drift, Variegated Paths: Mapping Administrative Transformation Strategies Under Illiberal Rule (2025) · cites this paper as Menezes and Barbosa 2021

    Section 4 (page unavailable) says Bolsonaro retained the Environment Ministry while hollowing it out, replacing civil servants with politically aligned appointees, and weakening environmental protections. Section 6 says governance was centralised to serve a narrow set of interests. This supports the Brazil example, but the paper does not establish neoclientelism or patronage-driven governance, and it does not address Peru or Serbia. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Gudynas, Eduardo. 2015. Extractivismos en América del Sur y sus efectos derrame. Bulletin De La Société Suisse des Américanistes 76:13-23.
  2. Gudynas, Eduardo. 2020. Ecología política del fuego: ambiente y desarrollo en los incendios sudameri- canos de 2019. In Informe Ambiental 2020: Lo ambiental debe ser política de Estado, Vol. 12, ed. Andrés Nápoli, Pía Marchegiani, 40-50. Buenos Aires: Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Menezes, R. G., & Barbosa, R.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de Brasília (BR)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Barbosa, Ricardo
Venue
Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft
Published
2021-06
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
229-247
ISSN
  • 1865-2646 (ISSN-L)
  • 1865-2654
OpenAlex
W3196233990
Cited by
104
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 3
FWCI
52.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
  • Fundação de Apoio à Pesquisa do Distrito Federal
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Politics and Society in Latin America
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Extractivism and Socioeconomic Issues
Keywords
environmental governance, Bolsonaro government, authoritarianism, environmental defenders, indigenous peoples, participatory decision-making, far right, Brazil

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review