Search results

At one end, family farming is seen as important for incentivizing local ­development. At another end, the Brazilian National School Feeding Program (PNAE) is a social assistance policy that provides food and nutrition for students enrolled in public schools. In 2015, the program fed 41.5 million students across the country. In 2009, these two worlds – family farming and school feeding – were connected through a public policy implemented by law. This law defines that 30% of the financial resources for the acquisition of school feeding, transferred by the federal government to states and municipalities, must be spent on items produced by family farming. However, even considering the legal requirement and many of the changes it has brought, many municipalities still do not meet this minimum requirement. In 2015, more than half of the 5,570 Brazilian municipalities, about 54%, did not reach the 30% minimum; that is, over 3,000 municipalities failed to meet that legal threshold. This context raises some questions: Why is the law not effective? What are the social structures that hinder the implementation of this public policy as it was conceived? One of the theoretical frameworks that could sustain such questioning is Structuration Theory (ST; Giddens, 2003). It brings the concept of structure duality, stating that there is no prevalence between social structure and human action, but rather a reciprocity. In this theory, the structure can be distinguished into three dimensions (signification, domination, and legitimation) and the interaction of these dimensions can lead to either transformation or continuity. Using the lenses of ST, our aim is to identify, analyze, and understand the reverberations of this public policy on social practices and how these reverberations could explain this state of things. For this, we conducted a preliminary field research, based on interviews with key agents involved in the school feeding program in a municipality in the Midwest of Brazil. The preliminary results revealed that the change induced by the law reflected on those agents, altering social practices. New procedures were adopted that transformed social practices pertaining to the dimension of signification. Nevertheless, challenges related to logistics (transport and storage), trust, training, and bureaucracy are still hindering the effectiveness of the intended public policy. As a limitation, we were not under conditions to grasp the changes while they occurred because our point of attention is the scenario after the enforcement of the relevant Law. Beyond that, our study uses ST to deal with the resistance of social structures to change even in a scenario of mandatory law enforcement.

We present a critical literature review debating Brazilian research on social and environmental accounting (SEA). The aim of this study is to understand the role of politics in the construction of hegemonies in SEA research in Brazil. In particular, we examine the role of hegemony in relation to the co-option of SEA literature and sustainability in the Brazilian context by the logic of development for economic growth in emerging economies. The methodological approach adopts a post-structural perspective that reflects Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory. The study employs a hermeneutical, rhetorical approach to understand and classify 352 Brazilian research articles on SEA. We employ Brown and Fraser’s (2006) categorizations of SEA literature to help in our analysis: the business case, the stakeholder–accountability approach, and the critical case. We argue that the business case is prominent in Brazilian studies. Second-stage analysis suggests that the major themes under discussion include measurement, consulting, and descriptive approach. We argue that these themes illustrate the degree of influence of the hegemonic politics relevant to emerging economics, as these themes predominantly concern economic growth and a capitalist context. This paper discusses trends and practices in the Brazilian literature on SEA and argues that the focus means that SEA avoids critical debates of the role of capitalist logics in an emerging economy concerning sustainability. We urge the Brazilian academy to understand the implications of its reifying agenda and engage, counter-hegemonically, in a social and political agenda beyond the hegemonic support of a particular set of capitalist interests.

Recently, at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen (COP 15),¹ in December 2009, we kept our eyes on the political representatives of the countries present, in the hope that decisions would be made that could restrain global warming, soil exhaustion levels, predatory deforesting, the near absence of potable water, the disappearance of animal and plant species and the damage caused by the pollution imposed on nature. Although with great caution, it was expected that the industrialised² nations, led by the United States,³ which over the years have reached a high level of economic and social development, would lead the negotiations, alongside China⁴ and the so-called emerging nations (India⁵ and Brazil, among others) that are now pursuing economic and social development, taking urgent measures with effectiveness and climatic justice, seeking to control global imbalance.