IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i12p6952-d578695.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Power in the Bioeconomy Transition: The Policies and Politics of Conservative Ecological Modernization in Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Mairon G. Bastos Lima

    (Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden
    Stockholm Environment Institute, 104 51 Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

The bioeconomy transition is a double-edged sword that may either address fossil fuel dependence sustainably or aggravate human pressures on the environment, depending on how it is pursued. Using the emblematic case of Brazil, this article analyzes how corporate agribusiness dominance limits the bioeconomy agenda, shapes innovation pathways, and ultimately threatens the sustainability of this transition. Drawing from scholarship on power in agri-food governance and sustainability transitions, an analytical framework is then applied to the Brazilian case. The analysis of current policies, recent institutional changes and the case-specific literature reveals that, despite a strategic framing of the bioeconomy transition as a panacea for job creation, biodiversity conservation and local development (particularly for the Amazon region), in practice major soy, sugarcane and meatpacking conglomerates dominate Brazil’s bioeconomy agenda. In what can be described as conservative ecological modernization, there is some reflexivity regarding environmental issues but also an effort to maintain (unequal) social and political structures. Significant agribusiness dominance does not bode well for smallholder farmers, food diversity or natural ecosystems, as major drivers of deforestation and land-use change (e.g., soy plantations, cattle ranching) gain renewed economic and political stimulus as well as greater societal legitimacy under the bioeconomy umbrella.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6952-:d:578695
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6952/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6952/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David L. Levy & Daniel Egan, 2003. "A Neo‐Gramscian Approach to Corporate Political Strategy: Conflict and Accommodation in the Climate Change Negotiations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 803-829, June.
    2. Olivier De Schutter, 2017. "The political economy of food systems reform," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(4), pages 705-731.
    3. Lisa Scordato & Markus M. Bugge & Arne Martin Fevolden, 2017. "Directionality across Diversity: Governing Contending Policy Rationales in the Transition towards the Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-14, February.
    4. Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Braña-Varela, Josefina & Gupta, Aarti, 2017. "A reality check on the landscape approach to REDD+: Lessons from Latin America," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 10-20.
    5. Mairon G. Bastos Lima, 2018. "Toward Multipurpose Agriculture: Food, Fuels, Flex Crops, and Prospects for a Bioeconomy," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 18(2), pages 143-150, May.
    6. Siegel, Karen M. & Bastos Lima, Mairon G., 2020. "When international sustainability frameworks encounter domestic politics: The sustainable development goals and agri-food governance in South America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    7. Otto Hospes, 2014. "Marking the success or end of global multi-stakeholder governance? The rise of national sustainability standards in Indonesia and Brazil for palm oil and soy," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(3), pages 425-437, September.
    8. Russo Lopes, Gabriela & Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Reis, Tiago N.P. dos, 2021. "Maldevelopment revisited: Inclusiveness and social impacts of soy expansion over Brazil’s Cerrado in Matopiba," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    9. repec:oup:erevae:v:44:y:2017:i:4:p:540-566. is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Mairon G. Bastos Lima & Joyeeta Gupta, 2014. "The extraterritorial dimensions of biofuel policies and the politics of scale: live and let die?," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 392-410, March.
    11. D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "A New Socio-economic Indicator to Measure the Performance of Bioeconomy Sectors in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    12. Sarah Pilgrim & Mark Harvey, 2010. "Battles over Biofuels in Europe: NGOs and the Politics of Markets," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 15(3), pages 45-60, August.
    13. Latorre, Sara & Farrell, Katharine N. & Martínez-Alier, Joan, 2015. "The commodification of nature and socio-environmental resistance in Ecuador: An inventory of accumulation by dispossession cases, 1980–2013," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 58-69.
    14. Eva Cudlínová & Valny Giacomelli Sobrinho & Miloslav Lapka & Luca Salvati, 2020. "New Forms of Land Grabbing Due to the Bioeconomy: The Case of Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-15, April.
    15. 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.
    16. Paola Sakai & Stavros Afionis & Nicola Favretto & Lindsay C. Stringer & Caroline Ward & Marco Sakai & Pedro Henrique Weirich Neto & Carlos Hugo Rocha & Jaime Alberti Gomes & Nátali Maidl de Souza & No, 2020. "Understanding the Implications of Alternative Bioenergy Crops to Support Smallholder Farmers in Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, March.
    17. D’Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Huisingh, Donald & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2021. "A circular economy model based on biomethane: What are the opportunities for the municipality of Rome and beyond?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1660-1672.
    18. Markus M. Bugge & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2016. "What Is the Bioeconomy? A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    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. Kieran Harrahill & Áine Macken-Walsh & Eoin O’Neill & Mick Lennon, 2022. "An Analysis of Irish Dairy Farmers’ Participation in the Bioeconomy: Exploring Power and Knowledge Dynamics in a Multi-actor EIP-AGRI Operational Group," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-39, September.
    2. Shahzad, Fakhar & Zaied, Younes Ben & Shahzad, Muhammad Asim & Mahmood, Faisal, 2024. "Insights into the performance of green supply chain in the Chinese semiconductor industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    3. Leire Barañano & Naroa Garbisu & Itziar Alkorta & Andrés Araujo & Carlos Garbisu, 2021. "Contextualization of the Bioeconomy Concept through Its Links with Related Concepts and the Challenges Facing Humanity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-18, July.
    4. de Queiroz-Stein, Guilherme & Martinelli, Fernanda S. & Dietz, Thomas & Siegel, Karen M., 2024. "Disputing the bioeconomy-biodiversity nexus in Brazil: Coalitions, discourses and policies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. Reis, Tiago N.P. dos & Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Russo Lopes, Gabriela & Meyfroidt, Patrick, 2024. "Not all supply chains are created equal: The linkages between soy local trade relations and development outcomes in Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    6. Barbosa de Andrade Aragão, Rafaela & Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Burns, Georgette Leah & Ross, Helen & Biggs, Duan, 2024. "‘Greenlash’ and reactionary stakeholders in environmental governance: An analysis of soy farmers against zero deforestation in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    7. Jiaomu Li & Bin Wan & Yaping Yao & Te Bu & Ping Li & Yang Zhang, 2023. "Chinese Path to Sports Modernization: Fitness-for-All (Chinese) and a Development Model for Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Yigit Kazancoglu & Cisem Lafci & Anil Kumar & Sunil Luthra & Jose Arturo Garza‐Reyes & Yalcin Berberoglu, 2024. "The role of agri‐food 4.0 in climate‐smart farming for controlling climate change‐related risks: A business perspective analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 2788-2802, May.
    9. Joana Castro Pereira & João Terrenas, 2022. "Towards a transformative governance of the Amazon," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(S3), pages 60-75, December.
    10. Claudia Horn, 2024. "The International and Local Politics of the Rural Environmental Registry: Brazil's Green Currency," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 55(6), pages 1230-1258, November.
    11. Alfredo de Toro & Carina Gunnarsson & Nils Jonsson & Martin Sundberg, 2021. "Effects of Variable Weather Conditions on Baled Proportion of Varied Amounts of Harvestable Cereal Straw, Based on Simulations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-23, August.
    12. Almut Schilling-Vacaflor, 2021. "Integrating Human Rights and the Environment in Supply Chain Regulations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-15, August.
    13. Melo dos Santos, Marcos Eduardo & Nem Singh, Jewellord & Castro, Rui & Santos, Hugo & Costa, Hirdan Katarina de Medeiros & dos Santos, Edmilson Moutinho, 2024. "SWOT analysis of Brazilian energy policy: A comparative panel data analysis of the twenty largest economies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    14. Joel Henrique Ellwanger & Carlos Afonso Nobre & José Artur Bogo Chies, 2022. "Brazilian Biodiversity as a Source of Power and Sustainable Development: A Neglected Opportunity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Jaroslav Demko & Ján Machava, 2022. "Tree Resin, a Macroergic Source of Energy, a Possible Tool to Lower the Rise in Atmospheric CO 2 Levels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Bastos Lima, Mairon G., 2022. "Just transition towards a bioeconomy: Four dimensions in Brazil, India and Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    17. Ollinaho, Ossi I. & Kröger, Markus, 2023. "Separating the two faces of “bioeconomy”: Plantation economy and sociobiodiverse economy in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).

    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. Bastos Lima, Mairon G., 2022. "Just transition towards a bioeconomy: Four dimensions in Brazil, India and Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    2. Barbosa de Andrade Aragão, Rafaela & Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Burns, Georgette Leah & Ross, Helen & Biggs, Duan, 2024. "‘Greenlash’ and reactionary stakeholders in environmental governance: An analysis of soy farmers against zero deforestation in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    3. Maximilian Kardung & Kutay Cingiz & Ortwin Costenoble & Roel Delahaye & Wim Heijman & Marko Lovrić & Myrna van Leeuwen & Robert M’Barek & Hans van Meijl & Stephan Piotrowski & Tévécia Ronzon & Johanne, 2021. "Development of the Circular Bioeconomy: Drivers and Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, January.
    4. George B. Frisvold & Steven M. Moss & Andrea Hodgson & Mary E. Maxon, 2021. "Understanding the U.S. Bioeconomy: A New Definition and Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Russo Lopes, Gabriela & Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Reis, Tiago N.P. dos, 2021. "Maldevelopment revisited: Inclusiveness and social impacts of soy expansion over Brazil’s Cerrado in Matopiba," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    6. Gaurav Kumar Porichha & Yulin Hu & Kasanneni Tirumala Venkateswara Rao & Chunbao Charles Xu, 2021. "Crop Residue Management in India: Stubble Burning vs. Other Utilizations including Bioenergy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Alexandra Gottinger & Luana Ladu & Rainer Quitzow, 2020. "Studying the Transition towards a Circular Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Transition Studies and Existing Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    8. Idiano D’Adamo & Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Enrica Imbert & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2022. "Exploring regional transitions to the bioeconomy using a socio-economic indicator: the case of Italy," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 989-1021, October.
    9. Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Kmoch, Laura, 2021. "Neglect paves the way for dispossession: The politics of “last frontiers” in Brazil and Myanmar," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    10. Uchechukwu Stella Ezealigo & Blessing Nonye Ezealigo & Francis Kemausuor & Luke Ekem Kweku Achenie & Azikiwe Peter Onwualu, 2021. "Biomass Valorization to Bioenergy: Assessment of Biomass Residues’ Availability and Bioenergy Potential in Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-21, December.
    11. Vance, C. & Sweeney, J. & Murphy, F., 2022. "Space, time, and sustainability: The status and future of life cycle assessment frameworks for novel biorefinery systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    12. Daniel Hausknost & Ernst Schriefl & Christian Lauk & Gerald Kalt, 2017. "A Transition to Which Bioeconomy? An Exploration of Diverging Techno-Political Choices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, April.
    13. Maria Backhouse & Kristina Lorenzen, 2021. "Knowledge Production and Land Relations in the Bioeconomy. A Case Study on the Brazilian Sugar-Bioenergy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, April.
    14. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen, J., 2021. "Integrating the green economy, circular economy and bioeconomy in a strategic sustainability framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    15. Maria Sylvia Macchione Saes & Beatriz Macchione Saes & Elis Regina Monte Feitosa & Peter Poschen & Adalberto Luis Val & Jacques Marcovitch, 2023. "When Do Supply Chains Strengthen Biological and Cultural Diversity? Methods and Indicators for the Socio-Biodiversity Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, May.
    16. Seok-Jun Kim & Kwang-Cheol Oh & Sun-Yong Park & Young-Min Ju & La-Hoon Cho & Chung-Geon Lee & Min-Jun Kim & In-Seon Jeong & Dae-Hyun Kim, 2021. "Development and Validation of Mass Reduction Prediction Model and Analysis of Fuel Properties for Agro-Byproduct Torrefaction," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-14, September.
    17. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    18. Idiano D’Adamo & Piergiuseppe Morone & Donald Huisingh, 2021. "Bioenergy: A Sustainable Shift," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-5, September.
    19. Liesbeth de Schutter & Stefan Giljum & Tiina Häyhä & Martin Bruckner & Asjad Naqvi & Ines Omann & Sigrid Stagl, 2019. "Bioeconomy Transitions through the Lens of Coupled Social-Ecological Systems: A Framework for Place-Based Responsibility in the Global Resource System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & Kröger, Markus & Dressler, Wolfram, 2022. "From pro-growth and planetary limits to degrowth and decoloniality: An emerging bioeconomy policy and research agenda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6952-:d:578695. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.