IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v77y2017icp24-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inter-sectoral determinants of forest policy: the power of deforesting actors in post-2012 Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Kröger, Markus

Abstract

Typically, forest policy-analysis focuses on the forest industry; however, this article argues that analysis should take into consideration non-forest economic–political sectors, creating an inter-sectoral analysis of pathways. An analysis of Brazil's recent forest governance changes allows to outline the political dynamics, thrust and ideas that most influence the use of forests in a political economy whose overall developmental and environmental policies are defined primarily by agribusiness. The Brazilian Congress passed a New Forest Code in 2012, greatly relaxing the previous Code from 1965. The law-changing project was an illustration of the tension between the large landholders-lobby, and the new sustainability demands of various sorts of “green economy” proponents. The recent framing of forests by the agribusiness lobby and the Minister of Agriculture are assessed to explain why and how the understanding and pathway of sustainability in relation to forest and other land uses has changed since 2012. Studies on the major impacts of the post-2012 forest laws are also reviewed. A novel approach is taken, uniting an analysis of large-scale agriculture, tree plantation companies, and socio-environmentalists. It is shown how the New Forest Code and other measures that have brought together the agricultural and forestry frontiers, policies and vocabularies in Brazil have made their united analysis necessary. Brazil provides an important case to study how some parts of the “brown economy” and “green capitalism” pathways are supporting each other in practice, and how the forest industry has become a key actor in this alliance, to the detriment of “socio-environmentalism”.

Suggested Citation

  • Kröger, Markus, 2017. "Inter-sectoral determinants of forest policy: the power of deforesting actors in post-2012 Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 24-32.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:77:y:2017:i:c:p:24-32
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934116301204
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brenda Baletti, 2014. "Saving the Amazon? Sustainable Soy and the New Extractivism," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(1), pages 5-25, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mairon G. Bastos Lima, 2021. "Corporate Power in the Bioeconomy Transition: The Policies and Politics of Conservative Ecological Modernization in Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thaler, Gregory M. & Viana, Cecilia & Toni, Fabiano, 2019. "From frontier governance to governance frontier: The political geography of Brazil’s Amazon transition," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 59-72.
    2. Lisa L. Rausch & Holly K. Gibbs, 2016. "Property Arrangements and Soy Governance in the Brazilian State of Mato Grosso: Implications for Deforestation-Free Production," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-16, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:77:y:2017:i:c:p:24-32. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.