‘Greenlash’ and reactionary stakeholders in environmental governance: An analysis of soy farmers against zero deforestation in Brazil

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS Forest Policy and Economics Pub Date : 2024-06-08 DOI:10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103267
Rafaela Barbosa de Andrade Aragão , Mairon G. Bastos Lima , Georgette Leah Burns , Helen Ross , Duan Biggs
{"title":"‘Greenlash’ and reactionary stakeholders in environmental governance: An analysis of soy farmers against zero deforestation in Brazil","authors":"Rafaela Barbosa de Andrade Aragão ,&nbsp;Mairon G. Bastos Lima ,&nbsp;Georgette Leah Burns ,&nbsp;Helen Ross ,&nbsp;Duan Biggs","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The rapid disappearance of tropical forests has led to increased adoption of sustainability commitments. However, implementing zero-deforestation commitments faces numerous challenges, including resistance from those who benefit from the current practices in agricultural commodity-exporting countries, such as large-scale farmers. This study focuses on industrial soy farmers in Tocantins, a Brazilian state in the Cerrado ecoregion with high soy-driven deforestation rates. Drawing from a review of the land-use change literature in Brazil and background interviews with soy farmers in Tocantins, we ran a focus group with them to appraise three scenarios of increased restrictions on agricultural land-use expansion. They are: (1) access to a productivity-increasing technology conditioned to refraining from opening new farms in areas with native vegetation; (2) a hardened European policy limiting imports to conversion-free soy regardless of the ecosystem; and (3) a strengthening of Brazil's environmental policy, increasing the amount of land farmers are to set aside for conservation. Our findings show Brazilian soy farmers are highly skeptical of environmental regulations and suspicious of foreign actors. While rallying for greater autonomy, they rejected attempts to rein in their (agri)business-as-usual practices and dismissed such policy efforts as ultimately driven by hidden agendas – showing a strong inclination to resort to conspiracy theories, understood as alternative explanations that attribute events to scheming by powerful actors. A frontier mindset, underscored by libertarian values, coupled with distrust in state institutions or in the motives of foreign regulators thus create an obstructive, reactionary stance in the face of zero-deforestation efforts in Brazil.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"166 ","pages":"Article 103267"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001217/pdfft?md5=5e92259b2899b62281925ff85d2fcc05&pid=1-s2.0-S1389934124001217-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001217","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rapid disappearance of tropical forests has led to increased adoption of sustainability commitments. However, implementing zero-deforestation commitments faces numerous challenges, including resistance from those who benefit from the current practices in agricultural commodity-exporting countries, such as large-scale farmers. This study focuses on industrial soy farmers in Tocantins, a Brazilian state in the Cerrado ecoregion with high soy-driven deforestation rates. Drawing from a review of the land-use change literature in Brazil and background interviews with soy farmers in Tocantins, we ran a focus group with them to appraise three scenarios of increased restrictions on agricultural land-use expansion. They are: (1) access to a productivity-increasing technology conditioned to refraining from opening new farms in areas with native vegetation; (2) a hardened European policy limiting imports to conversion-free soy regardless of the ecosystem; and (3) a strengthening of Brazil's environmental policy, increasing the amount of land farmers are to set aside for conservation. Our findings show Brazilian soy farmers are highly skeptical of environmental regulations and suspicious of foreign actors. While rallying for greater autonomy, they rejected attempts to rein in their (agri)business-as-usual practices and dismissed such policy efforts as ultimately driven by hidden agendas – showing a strong inclination to resort to conspiracy theories, understood as alternative explanations that attribute events to scheming by powerful actors. A frontier mindset, underscored by libertarian values, coupled with distrust in state institutions or in the motives of foreign regulators thus create an obstructive, reactionary stance in the face of zero-deforestation efforts in Brazil.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
环境治理中的 "绿色闪光 "和反动的利益相关者:对巴西豆农反对零毁林的分析
热带森林的迅速消失促使越来越多的国家做出可持续性承诺。然而,履行零毁林承诺面临诸多挑战,包括来自农业商品出口国现行做法的受益者(如大型农场主)的阻力。本研究的重点是巴西托坎廷斯州的工业大豆种植农,该州位于塞拉多生态区,大豆导致的森林砍伐率很高。根据对巴西土地利用变化文献的回顾以及对托坎廷斯州大豆种植农的背景访谈,我们与他们进行了一次焦点小组讨论,以评估加强对农业用地扩张限制的三种情景。它们是(1)获得提高生产力的技术,条件是不在有原生植被的地区开设新农场;(2)强化欧洲政策,限制进口无转换大豆,无论生态系统如何;(3)加强巴西的环境政策,增加农民为保护而预留的土地数量。我们的研究结果表明,巴西豆农对环境法规持高度怀疑态度,并对外国参与者心存疑虑。在争取更大自主权的同时,他们拒绝接受对其 "一切照旧 "的(农业)做法进行约束的尝试,并认为这些政策努力最终是由隐藏的议程驱动的--这表明他们有强烈的诉诸阴谋论的倾向,阴谋论被理解为将事件归因于有权势者阴谋的替代解释。自由主义价值观所强调的前沿思维,加上对国家机构或外国监管机构动机的不信任,在巴西零毁林努力面前形成了一种阻碍性的反动立场。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Forest Policy and Economics
Forest Policy and Economics 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
148
审稿时长
21.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.
期刊最新文献
A generalized Faustmann model with multiple carbon pools Enhancing the economic feasibility of fuel treatments: Market and policy pathways for US Federal Lands The oil palm replanting imperative: Are smallholder farmers willing to participate? Reviewing factors that influence voluntary participation in conservation programs in Latin America Preliminary evidence of softwood shortage and hardwood availability in EU regions: A spatial analysis using the European Forest Industry Database
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1