In 2020, the Brazilian Executive Branch introduced Bill (PL) 191/2020 to the National
Congress, which was expedited under an emergency designation that same year. This legislative
measure, designed to regulate mining activities within Indigenous Territories (ITs), was not the
first government initiative on this issue, nor was it the first time that mining in ITs was discussed
within the combined political agendas of the executive and legislative branches. Despite the
lack of resolution on this political issue by 2023, it has been acknowledged by political
authorities as a significant concern and has consistently been included on the agendas of the
executive and legislative branches for the past 40 years, and more recently, of the judiciary. The
issue has prompted numerous debates and conflicts over interests among parliamentarians most
actively involved. Given the political and social significance of the topic, the principal aim of
this study is to analyze the evolution and diversification of conflicts, strategies, and discourses
related to indigenous mineral policy within the Legislative Branch since the enactment of the
current Brazilian Federal Constitution. This research involved several stages of data review and
categorization, focusing on legislative initiatives concerning the issue. The comprehensive
dataset analyzed includes: 47 bills, 3 complementary bills, 2 provisional measures, 30
legislative decree projects, 1 constitutional amendment, and 167 parliamentary amendments
from both the Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate. These initiatives were evaluated
using the content analysis method as proposed by Bardin (1977). Additionally, the profiles of
key political actors involved over time were scrutinized. The organization and analysis of the
results employed the Advocacy Coalition Framework by Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith (1994),
enhanced by the methodological approaches and reflections of Capano (2009; 2012) and Kay
(2006) for conducting dynamic analyses of public policies. The analysis identified two
advocacy coalitions that have significantly influenced the agenda on mining in Indigenous
Territories over time. The first coalition, advocating for the maximization of mineral extraction
in Amerindian territories, comprises political actors financed by the mining and agribusiness
sectors; they oppose the demarcation of Indigenous lands and support illegal mining. The
second coalition contends that mineral exploitation in Indigenous lands should incorporate
stringent social, environmental, and economic preservation measures. Ultimately, the ideas and
interests of these advocacy coalitions, actions by the Executive Branch, the institutional
framework of the National Mining Agency, and Brazil’s international image, have been pivotal
in shaping the variations and stalemates of this decision-making agenda within the Legislative
Power over time.
|
