Abstract
Brazil is much privileged with biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, the poor implementation of its environmental policies may offer fertile ground for corruption, thereby endangering ecosystem protection. It is widely agreed that corruption thrives where impunity prevails. This view lies with principal-agent theory. Nevertheless, the limited outcomes of anti-corruption interventions worldwide cast doubts on whether corruption can be sufficiently explained by principal-agent theory alone. In this context, we discuss corruption in Brazil’s environmental governance in light of the theoretical viewpoints of collective action and problem-solving. Drawing on these two perspectives, we argue that environmental policy instruments, such as environmental licensing, might be less prone to corruption by eliminating their major inefficiencies. That is, procedural problems (e.g., excessive bureaucracy, ambiguity in legal procedures and lack of electronic information systems) and absence of legitimacy and scientific credibility. Finally, we introduce the anti-corruption coalition Watershed Environmental Net—Coastal Watershed, from Public Prosecutor’s Office of Paraná State, and touch on corruption from a more closely principal-agent perspective. These three perspectives shed light on distinct and yet important issues regarding curbing corruption in Brazil’s environmental governance. Therefore, it is imperative that they be viewed as complementary rather than alternative approaches.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Act n° 12.651/2012 substituted the Act n° 4.771/1965 (Forest Code) and, considering its lack of constitutionality, it is object of three (Unconstitutionality Direct Actions) (Ações Diretas de Inconstitucionalidade), in the Supreme Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal), proposed by the Federal Prosecuto’s Office (ADIs 4901, 4902 e 4903), which treats about permanent preservation areas, legal reserve reduction and amnesty to environment offenders.
References
ABEMA. (2013). Novas propostas para o licenciamento ambiental no Brasil. Brasília: Associação Brasileira de Entidades Estaduais de Meio Ambiente.
Andreoli, C. V. (1992). Principais resultados da política ambiental brasileira: o setor público. Revista de Administração Pública, 4, 10–31.
Ashford, N. A. (2002). Government and environmental innovation in Europe and North America. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 1417–1434.
Azevedo-Santos, V. M., Fearnside, P. M., Oliveira, C. S., Padial, A. A., Pelicice, F. M., Lima, D. P., Simberloff, D., Lovejoy, T. E., Magalhaes, A. L. B., Orsi, M. L., Agostinho, A. A., Esteves, F. A., Pompeu, P. S., Laurance, W. F., Petrere, M., Mormul, R. P., & Vitule, J. R. S. (2017). Removing the abyss between conservation science and policy decisions in Brazil. Biodiversity and Conservation, 26, 1745–1752.
Banerjee, O., Macpherson, A. J., & Alavalapati, J. (2009). Toward a policy of sustainable forest management in Brazil – A historical analysis. The Journal of Environment & Development, 18, 130–153.
Bartlett, R. V., & Kurian, P. A. (1999). The theory of environmental impact assessment: Implicit models of policy-making. Policy and Politics, 27(4), 415–433.
Batory, A. (2012). Why do anti-corruption laws fail in Central Eastern Europe? A target compliance perspective. Regulation & Governance, 6, 66–82.
Benjamin, A. H. (2001). Um novo modelo para o ministério público na proteção do meio ambiente. In A. B. Alves, A. G. Rufino, José A. F. Silva, (Org.). Funções institucionais do ministério público (pp. 391–400). Saraiva: São Paulo.
Benjamin, A. H. (2003). Introdução ao direito ambiental brasileiro. In J. R. Soares, F. Galvão (Coord.). Direito ambiental na visão da magistratura e do Ministério Público (pp. 11–118). Belo Horizonte: Del Rey.
Bragagnolo, C., Lemos, C. C., Ladle, R. J., & Pellin, A. (2017). Streamlining or sidestepping? Political pressure to revise environmental licensing and EIA in Brazil. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 65, 86–90.
Briassoulis, H. (1999). Who plans whose sustainability? Alternative roles for planners. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 42(6), 889–902.
Brito, B., & Barreto, P. (2011). A regularização fundiária avançou na Amazônia? Os dois anos do programa Terra Legal. Belém, Brasil: Instituto do Homem e Meio Ambiente da Amazônia.
Brito, B., & Barreto, P. (2015). Regularização fundiária no Pará: Afinal qual é o problema? Belém, Brazil: Instituto do Homem e Meio Ambiente da Amazônia.
Brondizio, E. S., Ostrom, E., & Young, O. R. (2009). Connectivity and the governance of multilevel social-ecological systems: The role of social capital. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 34, 253–278.
Carpenter, S. R., Mooney, H. A., Agard, J., Capistrano, D., Defries, R. S., Diaz, S., Dietz, T., Duraiappah, A. K., Oteng-Yeboah, A., Pereira, H. M., Perrings, C., Reid, W. V., Sarukhan, J., Scholes, R. J., & Whyte, A. (2009). Science for managing ecosystem services: Beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 1305–1312.
Cashmore, M., Richardson, T., Hilding-Ryedvik, T., & Emmelin, L. (2010). Evaluating the effectiveness of impact assessment instruments: Theorising the nature and implications of their political constitution. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30, 371–379.
CNI. (2013). Proposta da Indústria para o Aprimoramento do Licenciamento Ambiental. Brasília: Confederação Nacional da Indústria (CNI).
Crawford, C. (2009). Defending public prosecutors and defining Brazil’s environmental “public interest”: A review of Lesley McAllister’s making law matter: Environmental protection and legal institutions in Brazil. The George Washington International Law Review, 40(3), 619–647.
Costanza, R., et al. (2014, May). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions, 26, 152–158.
Daiberth, A. (2009). Historical views on environment and environmental Law in Brazil. The George Washington International Law Review, 40, 779–840.
Defries, R. S., Foley, J. A., & Asner, G. P. (2004, June). Land-use choices: Balancing human needs and ecosystem function. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2(5), 249–257.
de Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., & Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 260–272.
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. (2014). Lei Anticorrupção Um retrato das práticas de compliance na era da empresa limpa. Accessed September 5, 2017, from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/br/Documents/risk/Lei_Anticorrupcao.pdf
Dirzo, R., & Raven, P. H. (2003). Global state of biodiversity and loss. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28, 137–167.
Drummond, J., & Barros-Platiau, A. F. (2006). Brazilian environmental laws and policies, 1934–2002: A critical overview. Law & Policy, 28, 83–108.
Duchelle, A. E., et al. (2014). Linking forest tenure reform, environmental compliance, and incentives: Lessons from REDD plus Initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon. World Development, 55, 53–67.
Falk, A., & Kosfeld, M. (2006). The hidden costs of control. American Economic Review, 96, 1611–1630.
Fearnside, P. M. (2003). Conservation policy in Brazilian Amazonia: Understanding the dilemmas. World Development, 31(5), 757–779.
Fearnside, P. M. (2005, June). Deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia: History, rates, and consequences. Conservation Biology, 19(3), 680–688.
Fearnside, P. M., & Lima de Alencastro Graca, P. M. (2006). BR-319: Brazil’s manaus-porto velho highway and the potential impact of linking the arc of deforestation to central Amazonia. Environmental Management, 38(5), 705–716.
Fearnside, P. M. (2016). Brazilian politics threaten environmental policies. Science, 353, 746–748.
FMASE. (2013). Proposta de Diretrizes Institucionais para o Novo Marco Legal do licenciamento ambiental dos empreendimentos do setor elétrico. Brasília: Fórum de Meio Ambiente do Setor Elétrico (FMASE).
Foley, J. A., Defries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., Chapin, F. S., Coe, M. T., Daily, G. C., Gibbs, H. K., Helkowski, J. H., Holloway, T., Howard, E. A., Kucharik, C. J., Monfreda, C., Patz, J. A., Prentice, I. C., Ramankutty, N., & Snyder, P. K. (2005). Global consequences of land use. Science, 309, 570–574.
Foley, J. A., et al. (2007, February). Amazonia revealed: Forest degradation and loss of ecosystem goods and services in the Amazon Basin. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 5(1), 25–32.
Fonseca, A., Sanchez, L. E., & Ribeiro, J. C. J. (2017). Reforming EIA systems: A critical review of proposals in Brazil. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 62, 90–97.
Franco, J. G. O. (2005). Direito Ambiental Matas Ciliares – Conteúdo Jurídico e Biodiversidade. Curitiba: Juruá.
Gasparatos, A. (2010). Embedded value systems in sustainability assessment tools and their implications. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(8), 1613–1622.
Gibbs, H. K., Brown, S., Niles, J. O., & Foley, J. A. (2007). Monitoring and estimating tropical forest carbon stocks: Making REDD a reality. Environmental Research Letters, 2, 13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/2/4/045023
Gibbs, H. K., Rausch, L., Munger, J., Schelly, I., Morton, D. C., Noojipady, P., Soares-Filho, B., Barreto, P., Micol, L., & Walker, N. F. (2015). Brazil’s soy moratorium. Science, 347, 377–378.
Guesnerie, R., & Laffont, J. J. (1984). A complete solution to a class of principal-agent problems with an application to the control of a self-managed firm. Journal of Public Economics, 25, 329–369.
Hochstetler, K. (2011). The politics of environmental licensing: Energy projects of the past and future in Brazil. Studies in Comparative International Development, 46, 349–371.
Hooper, D. U., et al. (2005, February). Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: A consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs, 75(1), 3–35.
INPE. (2016). Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais. Available at http://www.inpe.br/
Jain, A. K. (2001). Corruption: A review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 15, 71–121.
Jay, S., Jones, C., Slinn, P., & Wood, C. (2007). Environmental impact assessment: Retrospect and prospect. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27, 287–300.
Kareiva, P., et al. (2007, June 29). Domesticated nature: Shaping landscapes and ecosystems for human welfare. Science, 316(5833), 1866–1869.
Klink, C. A., & Machado, R. B. (2005). Conservation of the Brazilian Cerrado. Conservation Biology, 19, 707–713.
Lawson, L. (2009). The politics of anti-corruption reform in Africa. Journal of Modern African Studies, 47, 73–100.
Lemos, M. C., & Agrawal, A. (2006). Environmental governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31, 297–325.
Lopes, C. (2005). Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Humano: a agenda emergente para o novo milênio. Unesp: São Paulo.
Mackendrick, N. A. (2005). The role of the state in voluntary environmental reform: A case study of public land. Policy Sciences, 38, 21–44.
Malhi, Y., Roberts, J. T., Betts, R. A., Killeen, T. J., Li, W., & Nobre, C. A. (2008). Climate change, deforestation, and the fate of the Amazon. Science, 319, 169–172.
Marengo, J. A., & Espinoza, J. C. (2016). Extreme seasonal droughts and floods in Amazonia: Causes, trends and impacts. International Journal of Climatology, 36, 1033–1050.
Marquette, H., & Pfeiffer, C. (2015). Corruption and collective action. In Developmental leadership programme (Research paper 32). University of Birmingham.
Mcallister, L. K. (2008). Making law matter. Environmental protection and legal institutions in Brasil. Stanford: Stanford Law Books.
Meppem, T., & Bourke, S. (1999). Different ways of knowing: A communicative turn toward sustainability. Ecological Economics, 30(3), 389–404.
Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2006). Corruption: Diagnosis and treatment. Journal of Democracy, 17, 86–99.
Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D. R., Chan, K. M. A., Daily, G. C., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P. M., Lonsdorf, E., Naidoo, R., Ricketts, T. H., & Shaw, M. R. (2009). Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7, 4–11.
Nepstad, D., Mcgrath, D., Stickler, C., Alencar, A., Azevedo, A., Swette, B., Bezerra, T., Digiano, M., Shimada, J., da Motta, R. S., Armijo, E., Castello, L., Brando, P., Hansen, M. C., Mcgrath-Horn, M., Carvalho, O., & Hess, L. (2014). Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy supply chains. Science, 344, 1118–1123.
Nepstad, D. C., Stickler, C. M., Soares-Filho, B., & Merry, F. (2008). Interactions among Amazon land use, forests and climate: Prospects for a near-term forest tipping point. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 363, 1737–1746.
Nolte, C., Agrawal, A., & Barreto, P. (2013). Setting priorities to avoid deforestation in Amazon protected areas: Are we choosing the right indicators? Environmental Research Letters, 8(1).
OECD. (2015). OECD Environmental performance reviews: Brazil 2015. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Ondro, W. J., Couto, L., & Betters, D. R. (1995). The status and practice of forestry in Brazil in the early 1990s. The Forestry Chronicle, 71(1), 106–119.
Oreskes, N. (2004). Science and public policy: What’s proof got to do with it? Environmental Science & Policy, 7, 369–383.
Ostrom, E. (1999). Coping with tragedies of the commons. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 493–535.
Ozono, H., Jin, N., Watabe, M., & Shimizu, K. (2016). Solving the second-order free rider problem in a public goods game: An experiment using a leader support system. Scientific Reports, 6. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38349
Patriota, A. A. (2009). An introduction to Brazilian environmental law. The George Washington International Law Review, 40, 611–617.
Persson, A., Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2013, July). Why anticorruption reforms fail systemic corruption as a collective action problem. Governance-an International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions, 26(3), 449–471.
Philipp, J. R. A., Andreoli, C. V., Collet, B. G., & Fernandes, V. (2014). Histórico e Evolução do Sistema de Gestão. In J. R. A Philippi, M. R. Andrade, & B. G. Collet (Org.), Curso de Gestão Ambiental (2a ed., Vol. 1, pp. 19–50). Barueri: Manole.
Pope, J., Bond, A., Morrison-Saunders, A., & Retief, F. (2013). Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 41, 1–9.
Prieur, M. (2012). O Princípio da Proibição do Retrocesso Ambiental. Princípio da Proibição do Retrocesso Ambiental. Senado Federal (pp. 11–54). Brasília: Comissão de Meio Ambiente, Defesa do Consumidor e Fiscalização e Controle.
Rands, M. R. W., et al. (2010, September). Biodiversity conservation: Challenges beyond 2010. Science, 329(5997), 1298–1303.
Reydon, B. P., Fernandes, V. B., & Telles, T. S. (2015). Land tenure in Brazil: The question of regulation and governance. Land Use Policy, 42, 509–516.
Ribeiro, M. C., Metzger, J. P., Martensen, A. C., Ponzoni, F. J., & Hirota, M. M. (2009). The Brazilian Atlantic Forest: How much is left, and how is the remaining forest distributed? Implications for conservation. Biological Conservation, 142, 1141–1153.
Rodrigues, M. C. (2016a). A Regionalização como Estratégia de Proteção ao Meio Ambiente. Revista Jurídica do Ministério Público, ano 03, no 04, agosto de.
Rodrigues, Melissa Cachoni. A Regionalização como Estratégia de Proteção do Meio Ambiente. Revista Jurídica do Ministério Público do Estado do Paraná, ano 3 - n° 4, 2016b, p. 235–265.
Rothstein, B. (2011). Anti-corruption: The indirect ‘big bang’ approach. Review of International Political Economy, 18, 228–250.
Rylands, A. B., & Brandon, K. (2005). Brazilian protected area. Conservation Biology, 19(3), 612–618.
Sampaio, R. S. R. (2012). Direito ambiental – doutrina e casos práticos. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier/FGV.
Sánchez, L. E. (2013). Development of environmental impact assessment in Brazil. UVP Report, 27, 193–200.
Sano, H. (2012). The Brazilian National Environmental Policy: The challenge of plural environmental governance. Development, 55, 119–125.
Sappington, D. E. M. (1991). Incentives in principal-agent relationships. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, 45–66.
Segerson, K., & Miceli, T. J. (1998). Voluntary environmental agreements: Good or bad news for environmental protection? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 36, 109–130.
SFB. Serviço Florestal Brasileiro. (2016). Available at http://www.florestal.gov.br/
Sistema Ambiental Paulista. (2016). Secretaria do Meio Ambiente do Governo do Estado de São Paulo. Madeira legal vs. Madeira ilegal. Available at http://www.ambiente.sp.gov.br/madeiralegal/madeiralegalvsmadeirailegal/
Soares-Filho, B., et al. (2010, June 15). Role of Brazilian Amazon protected areas in climate change mitigation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(24), 10821–10826.
Soares-Filho, B., et al. (2014, April 25). Land use cracking Brazil’s Forest code. Science, 344(6182), 363–364.
Sunderlin, W. D. (1995). Global environmental-change, sociology, and paradigm isolation. Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions, 5(3), 211–220.
TEEB. (2010). TEEB report for business. London: Earthscan.
Treisman, D. (2000). The causes of corruption: A cross-national study. Journal of Public Economics, 76, 399–457.
Tscharntke, T., Klein, A. M., Kruess, A., Steffan-Dewenter, I., & Thies, C. (2005). Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity – ecosystem service management. Ecology Letters, 8, 857–874.
Ugur, M., & Dasgupta, N. (2011). Evidence on the economic growth impacts of corruption in low-income countries and beyond: A systematic review. London: EPPI Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
UNDP. (2008). Corruption and development: Anti-corruption interventions for poverty reduction, realization of the MDGs and promoting sustainable development. New York: United Nations Development Programme.
UNEP. 2009. Environmental governance. Accessed November 27, 2017, from http://staging.unep.org/pdf/brochures/EnvironmentalGovernance.pdf
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Program). (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Morgan, R. K. (2012). Environmental impact assessment: The state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30, 5–14.
Morin, E. (2011). Introdução ao Pensamento Complexo: Tradução de Eliane Lisboa (p. 5). Porto Alegre: Sulina.
Williams, A., & Dupuy, K. (2017). Deciding over nature: Corruption and environmental impact assessments. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 65, 118–124.
World Resources Institute. (2012). The corporate ecosystem services review. Guidelines for identifying business risks and opportunities arising from ecosystem change. Available at http://www.wri.org/publication/corporate ecosystem services review
World Resources Institute. (2008). Ecosystem services – A guide for decision makers. Available at http://pdf.wri.org/ecosystem_services_guide_for_decisionmakers.pdf
World Bank. (2008). Licenciamento Ambiental de Empreendimentos Hidrelétricos no Brasil: uma Contribuição para o Debate. Available at http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2008/03/10155469/environmental-licensing-hydroelectric-projects-brazil-contribution-debate-vol-1-3-summary-report
Wunder, S. (2007). The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation. Conservation Biology, 21, 48–58.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Oliveira, R.K., Andreoli, C.V., da Mata Cavalcante, P. (2019). Curbing Corruption in Brazilian Environmental Governance: A Collective Action and Problem-solving Approach. In: Stehr, C., Dziatzko, N., Struve, F. (eds) Corporate Social Responsibility in Brazil. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90605-8_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90605-8_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90604-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90605-8
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)