Proceedings World Bioenergy 2010

52 world bioenergy 2010
CLIMATE CHANGE IN BRAZIL: PUBLIC POLICIES, POLITICAL AGENDA AND MEDIA
Magda Adelaide Lombardo; Ruimar Costa Freitas
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) / Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
Av. 24A, nº 1515, Bela Vista, 14506-900 Rio Claro – SP /
Av. Prof. Lineu Prestes 338. Cidade Universitária, 05508-000 São Paulo- SP
ABSTRACT: The climate change and sustainable development issue, especially in the context of energy production, have
been on the current national policy rhetoric, reflecting the focus of the issue on the world scenario. The Brazilian Agroenergy
Plan (2006-2011), considered as an strategic action of the federal government, is an attempt to organize a propose for
Research, Development, Innovation and Technology Transfer, aiming to grant sustainability, competitiveness and greater
equity between the agroenergy chain agents, starting with the reality analysis and future perspectives for the world energetic
matrix. In this context, this research seeks to analyze the proposals of the State of São Paulo to the laws implementations that
allows the goal accomplishment of 20% reduction on the greenhouse effect emissions until 2020 (base 2005), through action
to the deforestation control, creation of an adaptation fund, establishment of a sustainable transportation system, mapping the
vulnerabilities of the territory and financial mechanisms to the development of a low carbon economy. From the perspective
of the national media coverage agenda, that has extensively approached the climate changes theme, this research collaborates
to the analysis of sustainable projects inside the Brazilian perspective and context. This research will emphasize the relation
between media, political speech and public policies.
Keywords: Climate Change, Brazil, São Paulo, Public Policies, Political Agenda, Media, sustainability
1 INTRODUCTION
The world lives a crisis that may be unprecedented,
regarding changes in the global climate. Although the
causes and accountabilities had not been fully understood
by the scientific community, the consequences of these
changes no longer can be ignored.
Until now, the main concern of the global community
was development. However, in this new context,
development cannot be considered without sustainability
due to the impacts of inadequate anthropic intervention in
the environment associated with reckless use of natural
resources and concentration of the populations in urban
centers. The concentration of the populations itself in
relatively small amounts of land makes them more
susceptible to natural catastrophes and the improper
occupation and use of the soil in the urban areas and its
adjacencies escalates the threats.
The world energetic matrix, based on nonrenewable
sources, drives the world to a new paradigm: the need to
seek sustainability. It has also been driven by the concern
that carbon dioxide emissions from the burn of fossil
fuels affects the world climate, accelerating and
intensifying natural warming and cooling cycles.
The efforts worldwide to mitigation and adaptation to
the new reality and foreseen future, have its main player
in governments, which are looked after for an agenda that
balances the need to sustainability with the quest for
development. The role of governments in the market and
social arena are present through many prisms
(interventionist, minimum state… and so on) but we can
considerer that, in the end, the main role of any State
should be to orientate society and markets in all areas
through incentives and/or restrictions to meet the needs
and goals of communities.
Nation-states, remain reluctant to assume early
mitigation measures to climate change, making the
international arena a complex and intricate path to the
convergence of climate-friendly initiatives, but although
local and regional initiatives have been proven to be more
often easier to be taken, the international efforts still
seeks agreements with sovereign states, denying space in
the international agenda for local and regional initiatives.
Seems the working logic goes with efforts that grow from
the local/regional to national and global.
Boykoff (2007) [1] states that research has pointed to
the fact that the media content powerfully manipulate the
translation between climate science, policy and public.
Bennet (apud Boykoff, 2007) adds by saying that few
things are as integral part of our lives as the news, so, that
turned into a kind of a snapshot file of the pace, progress,
problems and hopes of society. He also says that
scientists tend to qualify their findings in light of the
uncertainties that pervade their research. For journalists
and political actors, these issues involving precaution,
probability and uncertainty are all difficult to translate in
a fluid, firm and unequivocal commentary, often valued
in the context of communication and decision making.
McBean and Hengeveld (2000) [2] argue that often
the government’s response to the perceived risk of threat
are often based on individual assessment and/or
collective probability of exposure to danger, and the
economic and social consequences of such exposure. It
should be noted that, generally, these assessments are
built from data supplied by the scientific community and
translated by the media.
Closer one is to the problem, more motivated it will
be to participate in solutions and easier will be to
implement actions that wouldn’t be considered in a larger
scale scenario. That is why the working logic of solutions
to mitigate and adapt to climate change should be
considered from the local to the global and there is no
way any real change is possible in the community
without the enrollment of the community itself, and one