The costs of elite-oriented multi-stakeholder forums to address deforestation: the case of the Green Municipalities Program in the Brazilian Amazon
Open accessAbstract
This paper examines the Green Municipalities Program (Programa Municípios Verdes – PMV) – a major multi-stakeholder forum designed to combat deforestation – in Pará state in the eastern Brazilian Amazon. We qualitatively analyzed in-depth interviews with 39 people with different perspectives: respondents with deep knowledge of the context but no direct involvement in the program, organizers of the program, diverse program participants, and diverse non-participants. We interrogated the PMV's strategy to address deforestation by collaborating directly with the powerful sectors that are driving it, while excluding indigenous and grassroots organizations from the process. The results reinforce the critique of 'anti-politics' approaches that prioritize technical solutions that focus on the consequences of environmental problems (such as deforestation) without addressing their underlying causes. The research highlights the risks of multi-stakeholder processes in highly unequal contexts that do not question the power of elites, and questions the legitimacy of initiatives that gain wide acclaim but are perceived locally as unjust.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The dominant agendas aimed at supply chain sustainability in the Amazon are neglectful of actors not involved in large-scale agricultural sectors.
“However, it currently does so more despite than helped by the dominant agendas aimed at supply chain sustainability in the Amazon, which typically are neglectful of actors not involved in largescale agricultural sectors (Pokorny et al., 2013;Milhorance and Bursztyn, 2018;Londres et al., 2021).”
From Beyond the “supply chain” framing: Cattle ranching as a vanishing mediator of deforestation and dispossession in the Brazilian and Colombian Amazon (2026) · cites this paper as Londres et al., 2021
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bastos Lima, M. G., & López, J. (2026) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2026.107532
- Authors
- Londres, M., Larson, A. M., & Barletti, J. P. S.
- Venue
- International Forestry Review
- Publisher
- Commonwealth Forestry Association
- Published
- 2021-07-26
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 76-89
- ISSN
- 1465-5489 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3194946271
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 1.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- The International Forestry Review (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Sciences and Humanities
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
- Keywords
- deforestation, multi-stakeholder forums, anti-politics, power and inequality, legitimacy, Brazilian Amazon, Pará, environmental governance
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