Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

1-24

The complex governance of the 2030

Agenda and the steering effects

of implementing the SDGs in Brazil

(2015-2022)

A governança complexa da Agenda 2030

e os efeitos-indutores da implementação

dos ODS no Brasil (2015-2022)

La gobernanza compleja de la Agenda

2030 y los efectos inductores de la

implementación de los ODS en Brasil

(2015-2022)

DOI: 10.21530/ci.v18n1.2023.1306

Thiago Gehre Galvão

Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Abstract

The 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

were conceived to politically guide countries according to their

interests. The implementation of this agenda in Brazil has oscillated

between governance without government and complex governance

with a social dimension. Based on a qualitative-interpretative

approach, Brazil’s adherence to the 2030 Agenda is discussed

1 Views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the

authors, and not necessarily to the author's current employer.

2 Doutor em Relações Internacionais pela Universidade de Brasília — UNB.

Professor vinculado ao Instituto de Relações Internacionais da Universidade de

Brasília e pesquisador associado do Earth System Governance Research Centre

Brasília. (gehre.unb@gmail.com). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9951-288X.

3 Doutorando em Relações Internacionais pelo PPG-IREL da Universidade de

Brasília. Earth System Governance Research Centre Brasília.

(rodrigo.ramiro@gmail.com). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2274-8207.

Artigo submetido em 23/10/2022 e aprovado em 30/04/2023.

ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE

RELAÇÕES INTERNACIONAIS

ISSN 2526-9038

• This is an open-access

article distributed under

the terms of a Creative

Commons Attribution

License, which permits

unrestricted use,

distribution, and

reproduction in any

medium, provided that

the original author and

source are credited.

• Este é um artigo

publicado em acesso aberto

e distribuído sob os termos

da Licença de Atribuição

Creative Commons,

que permite uso irrestrito,

distribuição e reprodução

em qualquer meio, desde

que o autor e a fonte

originais sejam creditados.

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

2-24

in a polycentric and socially based process. The results indicate the role of the SDGs in

guiding local discussions and actions, promoting institutional integration, the formation

of an innovative network and an architecture of social governance of local governments

and non-state actors.

Keywords: 2030 Agenda; Sustainable Development Goals — SDGs; Governance through

Global Goals; Local and Regional Governments (LRGs); Voluntary Local Reviews (VLRs);

Civil Society Organizations; Brazil.

Resumo

Agenda 2030 e os Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável (ODS) foram desenhados

para orientar politicamente países de acordo com a realidade local. A implementação

desta agenda no Brasil oscilou entre a governança sem governo e a governança complexa

com matiz social. A partir de abordagem qualitativo-interpretativa, discute-se a adesão do

Brasil à Agenda 2030 em um processo policêntrico e de base social. Os resultados indicam

o papel dos ODS em guiar discussões e ações locais, promovendo integração institucional,

formação de uma rede inovadora e uma arquitetura de governança social de governos

locais e atores não estatais.

Palavras-chave: Agenda 2030; Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável — ODS; Governança

por meio de Objetivos Globais; Governos Locais e Regionais (LRGs); Relatórios Locais

Voluntários (VLRs); Organizações da Sociedade Civil; Brasil.

Resumen

La Agenda 2030 y los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) fueron concebidos para

orientar políticamente a los países de acuerdo con sus intereses. La implementación de esta

agenda en Brasil ha oscilado entre gobernabilidad sin gobierno y gobernabilidad compleja

con dimensión social. Un enfoque cualitativo-interpretativo discute la adhesión de Brasil a

la Agenda 2030 en un proceso policéntrico y de base social. Los resultados indican el papel

de los ODS en orientar las acciones locales, promoviendo la integración institucional, la

formación de una red innovadora y una arquitectura de gobernanza social de los gobiernos

locales y actores no estatales.

Palabras-clave: Agenda 2030; Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible — ODS; Gobernanza a

través de Objetivos Globales; Gobiernos Locales y Regionales (GLR); Relatorios Locales

Voluntarios (VLR); Organizaciones de la sociedad civil; Brasil.

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

3-24

Introduction

Brazilian experiences in implementing the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable

Development Goals (SDGs) can help us understand the theoretical and practical

elements of political mobilization, the social engagement of actors and resources,

the building of flexible institutional arrangements and the processes of the

internalization of global norms in the domestic sphere.

The central argument of this article is that Brazil has transitioned from

governance without government for the 2030 Agenda to a complex governance

design that implements the SDGs based on social aspects. This article presents

an overview of Brazilian initiatives at the national level with a focus on strategic

adherence to the international order based on the 2030 Agenda. It connects

theoretical and conceptual elements to understand the Brazilian journey to engage

in the governance of the SDGs, focusing on the role of the National Commission

for the SDGs (CNODS), based on the experience of the Multiannual Plan with the

SDGs and on Brazilian initiatives in building and adapting targets and indicators

in the 2030 Agenda. Next, we highlight the institutional adjustments that took

place to implement the SDGs in Brazil, correlating the process of incorporation

in (i) Judiciary and Legislative initiatives, (ii) the articulations of civil society

organizations, and (iii) the official monitoring of the SDGs in Brazil. Finally, we

discuss how Brazilian local governments incorporate the SDGs, analysing the

concept of incorporating them into political practice and evaluating the Voluntary

Local Reviews (VLR) presented at the High-Level Political Forum (HLPF).

This article is methodologically based on a critical analysis of extensive

academic literature on the implementation of the SDGs, theoretical studies

on governance and public policy, and primary sources on legislation from the

three levels of government and documents from the three branches. Through a

qualitative content analysis, we analyse mechanisms and processes that forge

Brazilian experiences, of state and non-state actors, in the 2030 Agenda. To this

end, the academic literature on the 2030 Agenda was comprehensively reviewed.

Particularly its implementation in countries in the Global South and official

reports and documents on the implementation of the SDGs. In this last group,

the following stand out: the documents prepared within the scope of the National

SDG Commission and governmental institutions such as the Ministry of Planning,

Institute of Applied Economic Research (Ipea), and the Brazilian Institute of

Geography and Statistics (IBGE), in addition to the National and Local Voluntary

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

4-24

Reports, presented at the United Nations High Level Political Forum. The Spotlight

Reports, produced by the Civil Society Working Group for the SDGs, are also

worth mentioning. The review of the literature and documents was supplemented

by semi-structured interviews with key actors, state and non-state, and analysis

of public policies, national and local development plans, legislation, political

speeches, and relevant news. The critical review of the literature, documentary

investigation, and information extracted from the interviews formed the basis

for analysing the Brazilian experience in governance and implementation of the

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

A summary of the results highlight the following: (i) the impacts of political

fragmentation around the governance of the 2030 Agenda in Brazil, without a

National Commission to coordinate the implementation of the SDGs; (ii) the

importance of the steering effects of the SDGs to redefine priorities of public

policy, redirect the agency and rebuild structures as an innovative network,

and (iii) the constitution of the architecture of social governance guided by

local governments, parliaments, and civil society actors. In this context, non-

state actors, mainly local and regional governments, and CSOs, have developed

territorialization measures autonomously and implemented the SDGs in opposition

to the Brazilian Federal Government.

Governance, the incorporation of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development has become the primary

global reference to face most contemporary challenges for sustainability and

social inclusion, as well as thinking about the future of humanity. It is a global

design of “integrated and indivisible” objectives and goals, which are supposed

to be for “universal application” but which must take “into account the different

realities, capacities and levels of national development and respecting national

policies and priorities” (UNGA 2015, 6).

In this case, the current international order was established through the

cooperation and collaboration of a wide range of actors involving issues such

as eradicating poverty and hunger, access to clean water and energy, fighting

climate change, reducing inequalities, and empowering women and girls. This

international order 2030 (Galvão 2020) has a defined time horizon for carrying

out an ambitious and comprehensive agenda, organized into 17 Sustainable

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

5-24

Development Goals, 169 targets, and around 247 indicators (UNSD 2022). Political

negotiations were aimed at integrating global objectives within nationally defined

goals based on national interests and circumstances. The 2030 Agenda will arrive

in territories around the world on the assumption that each government “decides

how these aspirational and global goals should be incorporated into national

planning processes, policies and strategies” (UNGA 2015, 13).

This connection between the global and the local perspective is theoretically

expressed in the discussion on governance, which has spread in recent years as

a niche for understanding global politics. The concept of governance originates

in business management, “corporate governance”. It has been adopted by

international organizations of a neoliberal nuance, such as the World Bank and

the OECD, in the idea of “good governance” (Gonçalves and Inoue 2017). In a

distinct approach, Ostrom (2010) inspired discussion on the notion of polycentric

governance, in which a collective action is perceived at various levels, involving

people, organizations, and companies with a certain degree of autonomy in their

decision-making, engaged in efforts to organize a specific issue-area (Carlisle

and Grubi 2019).

Rosenau and Czempiel (2000) present the concept of “governance without

government” to state that many international matters can be organized without

the direct action of national governments. Also, the idea of governance as an

orchestration (Orsini et al 2020) is thought to build a platform through which

multiple agents can manage, coordinate, and combine aspirations, objectives,

goals, and political actions.

Finally, the complex governance approach (Kim 2020) highlights a pluricentric

approach of networks shaped by fragmented connections and that organizes the

relationships between relatively interdependent and autonomous actors. In this

direction, governance has been reinterpreted to reach traditionally marginalized

actors such as indigenous peoples and local communities, who come to be

considered part of this fractal geometry of power relations (Schneider 2012) and

characterize international politics in the 21st century.

For the debate on the SDGs, the theoretical framework provides a strategy for

implementing the 2030 Agenda as governance through global goals, containing

flexible institutional arrangements (Biermann and Kanie 2017; Vijge et al. 2020).

The main characteristics of the governance strategy through global goals are (i)

voluntarism, in the sense of making feasible aspirational aspects (intentions

and desires) related to public policy goals (Vijge et al. 2020; Finnemore and

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

6-24

Jurkovich 2020); (ii) flexibility by building institutional arrangements to bring

together public and private resources and to orchestrate efforts, at different levels

to connect global norms to local interests (Abbott, Berstein and Janzwood 2020);

(iii) inclusion in terms of the participation of different actors, mainly organized

civil society, in the territorialization processes of the 2030 Agenda (Okereke 2019;

Sénit and Biermann 2021); and (iv) national leeway to interpret and implement

objectives, based on the local interests, priorities, and policies, considering the

global goals’ ambition (Gupta and Nilsson 2017; Okitasari and Katramiz 2022).

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were an innovative approach

to sustainable development. They established flexible governance structures

based on clear and concise goals with an outstanding communicative appeal,

stimulating the mobilization of myriad actors until 2015. However, the MDGs

were formulated with a top-down and technocratic approach, mainly by the

OECD countries and international organizations (De Jong and Vijge 2021). The

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) overcome this pitfall by advancing the

inclusion of various actors, especially in the 2030 Agenda negotiation process;

improving the concept of sustainable development by integrating four dimensions

(economic, environmental, social, and institutional); and implementing a universal

agenda that covers both developed and developing countries (Kanie et al., 2017;

Dryzek and Pickering, 2019).

Governance through global goals is concerned with including goals in a

social narrative capable of articulating shared values and identities, and then

mobilizing support and motivating action. Indeed, there is a risk of complacency,

once the targets are set, there may be an incentive for authorities not to invest

time and energy to achieve them. Because the bonus of stating ambitious targets

had already been earned, and the costs of non-execution will be incurred in the

future (Young 2017; Finnemore and Jurkovich 2020).

In the Brazilian case, however, we found the emergence of another possible

framework, which we call complex governance of a social nature, hereafter social

governance. That is, the mobilization and engagement of state and non-state

actors in a hybrid model of orchestration to implement the 2030 Agenda and the

SDGs, starting from the bottom up, with the possibility of effective participation

of civil society, corporations, and subnational entities.

While the strategy of governance through global goals allows States and other

actors to implement the SDGs based on their ambitions and interests according

to their priorities (Vijge et al. 2020), social governance reflects a complex process

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

7-24

of territorialization of the goals of the 2030 Agenda, through multiple ways of

interpreting and translating global standards into local circumstances (Galvão

2019). On the other hand, the paradigm of social governance adopts a critical

perspective on the dominance of positions of the Global North in international

negotiations. The social governance framework of analysis challenges the opacity

in dealing with social issues and in absorbing the interests of marginalized

population groups, such as indigenous peoples and traditional communities. Also,

it points out the responsibilities of developed countries in socio-environmental

crises; and warning about the more systemic risks of not considering social

impacts in the debate on planetary boundaries (Dryzek and Pickering 2019;

Biermann et al. 2022).

The social governance of the 2030 Agenda in Brazil has been guided using

political instruments (advocacy initiatives) and cultural manifestations in the realm

of art, education, and communication to induce the process of implementing the

SDGs. Brazilian social governance of the 2030 Agenda galvanizes the mobilization

of actors and resources and ensures the capacity to participate in building,

implementing and monitoring the agenda. In this case, we affirm that the social

governance of the 2030 Agenda is connected to the idea of a culture of the SDGs

that serves as a guide for planning and actions by different governmental and

non-governmental actors.

The culture of the SDGs is manifested concretely in three layers: visibility,

that is, the use of markers (images, sounds), creating symbolic trails highlighting

values and principles of a specific SDG and advertising about the 2030 Agenda;

visualization, that is, organizational communication and public relations aimed

at communicating actions and practices related to the SDGs specific targets and

indicators; and vocalization, that is, the use of art and communication tools to

embed political messages of advocacy on behalf of the 2030 Agenda implementation

(Galvão and Ceccato 2021; Cabral and Galvao 2022).

Finally, social governance encapsulates a conception of incorporation of

the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs in the different locus of governmental and

non-governmental decision-making in society. Incorporation is understood as a

three-layer complex process of institutional adequacy, identity redefinition, and

discursive-practical embedding. Incorporation demands adjusting the institutional

mission, objectives, and daily routines to the goals of the SDGs. Also, it requires

redefining the social identity based on the relevance of SDGs on the specific

social role of individuals and organizations. Finally, incorporation involves the

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

8-24

use of rhetorical, discursive elements to inspire new generations to promote

territorial transformation (Galvão and Ramiro 2023).

Brazil’s engagement in the Governance of the SDGs

The country’s experience in setting international environmental and

development agendas since the 1970s, the process of institutionalizing the 2030

Agenda on a national level, and the virtual abandonment of the SDGs by the

Brazilian government are the object of the analysis in the following subsections.

International Proactivity in a domestic changing context

Brazil has historically been an active actor in international discussions on

environmental issues, since 1972, at the Stockholm Conference, hosting the

Rio 92 Conference and developing a sense of leadership by mixing diplomacy

with technical expertise in this path (Lago 2006). Brazil actively participated in

updating norms and practices related to the global agenda, paving the way from

Rio+20 to the post-2015 Agenda, with renewed ambitions to expand the concept

of sustainable development to include the economic and social dimensions as

well as the environmental ones.

One of the notable advances over previous development agendas has been the

increase in stakeholder participation, mainly through the Open Working Group

on Sustainable Development Goals (OWG-SDG). It was responsible for ensuring

the participation of state and non-state actors in formulating and implementing

the 2030 Agenda, and was formed by around 70 countries, including Brazil.

The Group worked between 2013 and 2014 to propose designs for the 17 SDGs.

Experience was gained from Rio-92, with Agenda 21, the political engagement

of Brazilian diplomacy on sustainability matters, and the mobilization around

the implementation of the MDGs and gave Brazil the material conditions to lead

this new development agenda.

The OWG-SDG Final Report (UN 2014) was presented at the UN General

Assembly in 2014 and formed the basis of the 2030 Agenda, which was approved

the following year. On the one hand, it was considered the most extensive

intergovernmental consultation in the history of the United Nations (Kanie et al.

2017), with the engagement of civil society and interested actors. On the other

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

9-24

hand, the least developed countries were still underrepresented in the negotiations

on the agenda and the localization processes (Sénit and Biermann 2021).

The auspicious international context for Brazilian leadership in the 2030

Agenda met a not-so-favourable one at home. Brazil lived through one of the most

turbulent moments in its history, which has affected the country’s international

insertion, and changed its proactive international profile in the environmental and

human rights arenas: the international shrinkage and the decline of the Workers’

Party’s power project (Lessa and Cervo 2014; Lessa, Becard and Galvão 2020).

Between 2013 and 2018, the country went through a period of high political

turmoil, defined by: the outbreak of popular demonstrations, anti-democratic

political manoeuvres, a corruption crisis led by Lava-Jato investigation, the misuse

of social media to disseminate disinformation, a presidential impeachment, the

rise of a conservative provisional government, and political polarization that

culminated with the election of President Bolsonaro in 2018 (Singer 2013; Santos

and Jalalzai 2021). The considerable Brazilian participation in the production of the

2030 Agenda was not immediately consolidated in the national governance of the

SDGs, and the Federal Government’s actions to internalize the SDGs were erratic.

About the National SDG Commission — CNODS

After the official launch of the 2030 Agenda at the UNGA meeting in September

2015, countries committed to establishing an instrument capable of organizing the

implementation of the SDGs in their territories. In Brazil, the National Commission

for the SDGs (CNODS) was formed almost two years after the 2030 Agenda was

adopted, in response to pressure from civil society in the context of political

turmoil (Nilo 2016), and during Michel Temer’s provisional government. CNODS

was responsible for “internalizing, disseminating and providing transparency

to the process of implementing the 2030 Agenda’’ from a collective structure of

reference for Brazilian democracy, the councils, of an advisory nature, and part

of the structure of the Government Secretariat of the Presidency of the Republic,

“for articulation, mobilization, and dialogue with federative entities and civil

society” (Brasil 2016).

CNODS had sixteen members selected by public notice for a two-year term,

with permanent assistance from the Institute of Applied Economic Research (Ipea)

and the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) (Ramiro 2021).

CNODS would orchestrate the implementation of the SDGs, including the

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

10-24

territorialization strategies, the definition of local goals and indicators, the

participatory processes, forms of implementation, follow-up, and monitoring of

the 2030 Agenda (CNODS 2017, 9)4. Regarding the results of the actions, Araújo

(2020, 138) highlights that CNODS, “despite its timid successes, did not live up to

this trajectory [of the Brazilian participation in the 2030 Agenda]”. After CNODS

had been operating for two years, it was dissolved by Decree 9.759/2019 (Brasil

2019), along with more than a hundred collegiate bodies, significantly reducing

social participation in public policies related to sustainable development. If, on

the one hand, the dissolution of CNODS removed an institutionalized space from

organized civil society, which influenced the implementation of the 2030 Agenda

in Brazil, on the other hand, it opened space for other initiatives to erupt from

the bottom up in the decision-making chain.

The SDGs and the Multi-Year Plan (PPA)

In 2015, while the final negotiations on the 2030 Agenda were taking place,

the 2016-2019 Multi-Year Plan (PPA) was disclosed by the government to Brazilian

society. Once both strategic planning instruments came into force in January

2016, there was no direct link between them. The alignment between the PPA

and the SDGs was checked by the Ministry of Planning, involving around 250

civil servants from 29 Federal institutions (MP 2018).

A high convergence between both instruments was confirmed. Indeed, it

was found that 95% of the SDG targets had some of the PPA attributes related

to their fulfilment, and each of the 2016-2019 PPA programs have attributes

related to some SDGs. This alignment of PPA and SDG attributes allow the 2030

Agenda to be incorporated at a Federal Governmental level. This process also

allows the SDG Agendas to be monitored in 2018 (based on 2017 data) and the

convergence to the CNODS 2017-2019 Action Plan (MP 2018).

Some advancements in Brazilian public policy management came from the

PPA-SDG alignment. Mainly the dialogue with public policy councils within the

scope of the social participation strategy of PPA (Ramiro 2021). The SDG Agendas

provided a comprehensive view of the relationships between the PPA and the

4 Among the main actions of CNODS, expressed in its Action Plan 2017-2019, the following stand out: (i) the

alignment between public policies, provided for in the PPA, and the SDGs, creating SDG Agendas in the

Integrated Planning and Budget System (SIOP), led by the Ministry of Planning, Development and Management

(MP); (ii) the adaptation of the SDG targets to the national reality, led by IPEA; and (iii) the definition of

national indicators for the SDGs, in a process led by the IBGE.

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

11-24

SDGs, which could be aggregated or disaggregated as required for the analysis

(MP 2018). It could also give visibility to which extent the Federal Government’s

actions have contributed to the achievement of each of the SDG goals. Finally, an

indirect effect of aligning the PPAs with the SDGs was to promote awareness of the

SDGs, promoting the coordination of the policy between different bureaucracies

in the Executive branch.

Some obstacles remained, such as the inability to make methodological

improvements, given that the 2018 Report was the only one published. The

President’s opposition to the agenda prevented the previous experience of PPA-

SDG being aligned to support the preparation of the 2020-2023 PPA; and the

intentional political blockage of new management ideas based on the SDG.

The 2020-2023 PPA presented by the Federal Executive to the Parliament

did not refer to the SDGs and was amended to include the following general

guideline: “pursuing the goals of the United Nations Sustainable Development

Goals.” This parliamentary amendment was clearly insufficient to affirm the

country’s commitment to the 2030 Agenda, and the only mention of the SDGs in

the 2020-2023 PPA was subject to a presidential veto, demonstrating the virtual

abandonment of the 2030 Agenda by the Brazilian government.

Adaptation of 2030 Agenda targets and indicators to the SDGs in Brazil

The creation of CNODS with its Strategic Planning, as well as aligning the

PPA-SDG, has generated a steering effect, especially regarding the social

accountability of Brazilian public policies. On that matter, it was crucial to adapt

the global goals and targets to the Brazilian reality. Resolution A/RES/70/01

specified that each government must define “its own national goals, guided by

the global level of ambition, but taking into account national circumstances”

(UNGA, 2015). The Institute of Applied Economic Research (IPEA) led the

process of adapting the SDG targets to the national reality, so avoiding reducing

the ambitions of the global targets, maintaining a coherent and integrated

agenda, and, whenever possible, aligning the SDG targets with national policies,

plans, and programs. That effort resulted in the following structure of targets:

39 maintained the original wording, two were considered not applicable to Brazil,

128 adapted to the Brazilian reality, and eight new targets were proposed to the

original targets. Thus, the proposal increased the number of targets from 169

to 175 (Ipea 2018).

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

12-24

With the adaptation of the targets, it was necessary to move forward in

adjusting the national indicators to that global framework. The Brazilian Institute

of Geography and Statistics (IBGE)5 use its statistical expertise and intellectual

capabilities to build databases to carry out this task. IBGE then formed 17 working

groups, one for each SDG, coordinated by specialists from the institution on the

various SDG themes and with other information-producing institutions taking

part, such as ministries, and regulatory agencies. This process6 culminated in

the odsbrasil.gov.br platform. Under the coordination of the IBGE, different

government institutions produce the indicators from their databases and make

them available on the platform, allowing the collection and presentation of the

SDG indicators. It becomes a statistical and geospatial database to facilitate the

sharing, visualization, and dissemination of SDG information in Brazil.

The platform continues to operate, but the process of centralizing and

publishing information faces some challenges, namely (i) the turnover/lack

of stability of human and financial resources; (ii) the complexity of the 2030

Agenda, which requires different methods and sources (censuses, sample

surveys, administrative records, registries, satellite images, among other sources);

(iii) the need for a consolidated information system, in different territorial areas

and encompassing its various dimensions, to allow the construction of global,

regional, national, municipal or other indicators of areas (Kronemberg 2019).

The IBGE regionally led the process of producing indicators for the 2030

Agenda since the beginning of the activities of the IAEG- SDGs, continuing the

work developed within the scope of the MDGs. Thus, the IBGE’s role as an

information provider predates the institutionalization of the SDGs in Brazil and

continues after the Federal Government’s virtual abandonment of the 2030 Agenda.

Despite this continuity, an unprecedented cut of resources to produce data, such

as the failure to carry out the National Population Census (Garcia 2021), and a

direct opposition between the Presidency and the information-producing bodies,

as is the case of the National Institute for Space Research (INPE) (McKenzie et

al. 2019), hampered the development of SDG indicators.

5 It is worth remembering that the IBGE represented the Mercosur countries and Chile in the Interagency Group

of Experts on SDG Indicators (IAEG- SDGs) since its creation in March 2015. The IAEG- SDGs was part of the

2030 Agenda negotiation structure to develop and implement a global framework of indicators to monitor the

SDGs.

6 In this context, three meetings were held to support the discussion of the new development agenda, which

took place in June 2015, and two after the CNODS were established, in September 2017 and April 2018, to

consolidate Brazilian information and make it available to the public.

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

13-24

Complexity shaping Brazil and the SDGs governance

The governance of the 2030 Agenda and the implementation of the SDGs

in Brazil was, therefore, an orchestration of key-actors such the Ministry of

Planning (Economy), IPEA, IBGE and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Itamaraty),

responsible for connecting global dictates to national interests, with other state

and non-state actors. With the dissolution of the CNODS, a virtual abandonment

of the 2030 Agenda followed at the Federal Government. It was expected that

the SDGs would have lost their steering-effect power. However, Bolsonaro’s

decommitment with the 2030 Agenda opened space for many other actors to

play a leading role. Emphasis is given to the experiences of the Judiciary, the

Legislative, subnational entities, and organized civil society.

Other branches seek to balance the absence of the executive

in the 2030 Agenda

The Judiciary is one of the most active public branches in the 2030 Agenda

implementation. Promoted by the National Council of Justice (CNJ), it involves

the entire Judiciary System and brings together a series of actions related to the

2030 Agenda. The pioneering approach in institutionalizing the 2030 Agenda has

led to indexing its database with 80 million cases for each of the 17 Sustainable

Development Goals. Based on the identification of the most judicialized matters

in each segment of the Judiciary and the Single Procedural Table (TPU), action

strategies are sought based on SDG objectives and indicators (Corrêa 2021). In

this process, the Federal Supreme Court (STF) tests an Artificial Intelligence

tool developed to support the classification of cases in Justice according to the

SDGs. Compared to the other branches, the Judiciary is one that most mobilize

attention to the 2030 Agenda at a national level. The STF presidency supports

the incorporation of the SDGs at the institutional mission and objectives, at the

rules of the Judiciary and at the discursive and practical commitments to the

SDGs implementation in Brazil.

In the Legislative Branch, the main initiative is the Joint Parliamentary

Front in Support of Sustainable Development Goals (JPF-SDG), composed of 209

parliamentarians, 200 deputies, and nine senators from 12 parties, predominantly

left and center-left, but with participants from across the political spectrum, all

except the extreme right, with the 27 federation units represented.

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

14-24

The Front’s work has focused on dialogue with civil society, particularly

with the Civil Society Working Group for the 2030 Agenda (GTSCA 2030). The

presentation of PL 1308/2021 by the JPF-SDG coordinator, Deputy Nilto Tattoo,

from the Worker’s Party is worth noting. The proposed Policy for promoting

the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development intends to bind the government

to adopting the objectives and goals of the agenda in the preparation of plans,

programs, and policies in an integrated manner and throughout the public policy

cycle, from scheduling to monitoring.

Since May 2021, the project has been blocked by the Committee on the

Environment and Sustainable Development of the Chamber of Deputies, headed by

Carla Zambelli from the Social Liberal Party, the far-right party from which President

Bolsonaro was elected, and which has not progressed. Strange associations with

the 2030 Agenda and left-wing globalism

, the lack of political support from a set

of parliamentarians who could push the SDGs forward due to the wide-ranging

connections with their political agendas, and since a clear budgetary linkage with

the SDGs cannot be created, it has prevented the Brazilian Parliament making

the 2030 Agenda the fuel for economic, environmental, social and institutional

transformations in the country.

Society pushes towards SDG implementation

The JPF-SDG became a site of political resistance, a trench to inspire and

coordinate SDG localization experiences and broaden the national dialogue on

the 2030 Agenda. This process was mainly due to pressure from the Organizations

of Civil Society (OSC) and social movements which acts as a pulsating force

(Hochstetler 2012) in implementing the SDGs in Brazil. Likewise, as the governance

without government of the 2030 Agenda in Brazil was consolidated, various

social articulations emerged to compose this complex social mosaic, in which

society, concerned with the country’s economic, social and environmental trends,

articulates its own initiatives.

Despite a certain degree of fragmentation/dispersion in the process of

implementing the SDGs in Brazil — due to the inaction of the Federal Government

7 The term "left-wing globalism" is used pejoratively, imprecisely, and vaguely by individuals associated with

the far-right movement to misinform and persuade their peers that multilateralism and its institutions pose

a threat to national sovereignty. In this article, its use aims to illustrate the far-right's approach towards

international agendas, in general, and the SDGs, in particular.

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

15-24

— a network of actors such as civil society organizations, the private sector,

local governments, and the academy is working through training, mobilization,

good practices and the exchange of experiences. These networks — such as

“estrategia ods”, “rede ods brasil” and ‘movimento ods” — act, both on national

and international levels, interacting with the UN Global Compact and regional

social participation mechanisms. In addition, we highlight the Civil Society

Working Group for the 2030 Agenda (GTSCA2030), which has become the

leading platform for unifying transformative actions based on the SDGs and

for criticizing the government’s implementation of the 2030 Agenda in Brazil.

Therefore, the follow-up to the Post-2015 Agenda negotiations provided these

CSOs and social movements with the possibility of renewing their political

credentials of engagement in the global development agenda, promoting actions

to disseminate and monitor the SDGs in Brazil.

Regarding the follow-up actions, we highlight the role of the Spotlight Reports

as the most valuable instrument for monitoring and evaluating the implementation

of the 2030 Agenda in Brazil. Produced since 2017 by GTSCA2030, they encapsulate

a historical series revealing the immense challenges that Brazilian society faces

in multiple dimensions and connections to achieve sustainable and inclusive

development. The Spotlight reports are built from official data and scientific

information from several specialized organizations. They have been portraying

the advance of “laws and norms explicitly against the SDGs” (2017), making

remarkable efforts to fight for human rights and the socio-environmental issues

left behind. The urgency of “changing the direction of Brazil” (2018), heading

towards unsustainability and setback, and moving away from a sustainable future

(2019) coming up against the framework of “Misgovernance of the SDGs” (2020).

In the context of worsening social conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic,

Brazil would no longer be a reference in the proposition of “global solutions to

[become] a problem for the world” (2021). The Spotlight report indicates, therefore,

how the country left the group of countries with the most protagonists in the

socio-environmental arena in the world to become part of the “vanguard of a

setback” worldwide (2022).

One of the main functions of the Spotlight Report would be to antagonize the

National Voluntary Report (RNV), an official document presented by countries at

the UN High Level Political Forum (HLPF), which has taken place annually since

2016. The only Brazilian RNV was presented in 2017 and was prepared by the

Presidency of the Republic without the participation of government agencies and

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

16-24

civil society (Brazil 2017). It showed an optimistic scenario of the achievements

and potential of the country. On the other hand, the Spotlight Report highlighted

a scenario of unsustainability and fear in which “the populations in greater

vulnerability and the environment are, of course, the most affected” (GTSC A2030

2017, 3). The GTSCA2030 has become the authentic Brazilian voice in the UN

HLPF. The Brazilian government should have presented the 2

VNR in 2019 but

withdrew from presenting it a few months before the event. The GTSCA2030 kept

its promise to show the world the 2030 Agenda being implemented in Brazil.

The prominent role of Brazilian Local Governments

Local and Regional Governments (LRG) play a key role in incorporating

the SDGs worldwide, particularly in federal states such as Brazil. The trend

of cities to assume more ambitious commitments than countries (Van der

Heijden 2018) was confirmed in the Brazilian case of 2030 Agenda localization.

SDGs induced multiple initiatives such as training, communication campaigns,

alignment of instruments for planning and management, sharing of knowledge

and methodologies, repositories of best practices, actions to raise the awareness

of other actors, as well as the development of monitoring and evaluation systems.

Indeed, “metropolitan areas and regions are making significant progress and

have already become engines of positive change. The role of global networks was

also crucial in ensuring the exchange of information and broad commitment to

the SDGs at regional and international levels” (UCLG 2017, 62).

Brazilian subnational entities have navigated the 2030 order individually

and in associations. Groups such as the National Confederation of Municipalities

(CNM), the Brazilian Association of Municipalities (ABM), and the National

Front of Mayors (FNP) function in the social governance scheme as a hub for

the dissemination of ideas and practices connected to the SDGs, centralizing the

2030 Agenda in its actions (Guia 2017).

With the establishment of parameters for measuring and monitoring the

implementation of the 2030 Agenda in Brazil at national and subnational levels,

it was hoped that Brazil could became a ‘showcase for good practices’ for the

world. On that matter, stands out the Sustainable Development Index (IDSC).

However, of the 46 countries that submitted a voluntary national review to the

HLPF, Brazil presented only one — the National Voluntary Report in 2017. This

fact paved the way for Brazilian subnational entities to gain relevance during the

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

17-24

HLPF meeting. At this point, the 9 Voluntary Local Reports (VLR) from Brazilian

municipal entities presented between 2017 and 2021 are evaluated.

Firstly, we highlight the diversity of Brazilian subnational experiences,

ranging from the municipality of Barcarena/PA, an Amazonian site with 100

thousand inhabitants, to three of the largest cities in the country, São Paulo/SP,

Rio de Janeiro/RJ, and Belo Horizonte/MG, whose metropolitan regions add up

to more than 40 million people.

Second, from a discursive point of view, it is possible to affirm that the SDGs

have affected subnational entities. There is a common language among the VLRs

derived from the international agenda, primarily due to the UN’s legitimacy

in leading and orchestrating the 2030 Agenda. The concepts of an integrated

and indivisible Agenda capable of promoting institutional integration, political

coherence, and social mobilization were widely used. The principle of “leaving

no one behind” has great appeal in a continental and unequal country like Brazil

and is present in all documents, both in the opening political statements and the

technical content. Furthermore, the 2030 Agenda visual identity permeates all

VLRs and is used in monitoring and evaluation tools, especially the 17 SDG icons.

Third, the 2030 Agenda implementation initiatives have strengthened

partnerships between state, non-state, international, national and local actors.

Partnerships with higher education institutions, regional research foundations, social

organizations, international organizations (UN-Habitat and UNDP), international

programs (UNESCO Global Action Program) and transnational networks of cities

such as ICLEI (Governments of Sites for Sustainability), and the Union of Ibero-

American Capitals (UCCI). It is worth highlighting the prominent role played by

the private sector, particularly local business associations, in internalizing the

SDGs into their practices, participating in local governance, and in transnational

networks such as the Global Compact (Llanos et al 2022).

Fourth, the existence of institutional memory in sustainability has triggered

a dual learning process. Past experiences in implementing development agendas,

particularly Agenda 21 and the MDGs, and participation in related agendas

such as the Paris Agreement and the New Urban Agenda, has created spaces

of experience for subnational entities to move forward in interactions with the

local governance of the SDGs. Given that subnational entities act as units of

the global governance system (Van der Heijden 2018), it is evident that they are

both influenced by international regimes and influence the direction of global

politics. Therefore, the implementation of the SDGs in the localities is closely

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

18-24

connected to a history of encounters with the international ones.

Fifth, there is an apparent steering effect of the 2030 Agenda in the institutional

integration of the SDGs in some Brazilian municipalities. In all cases evaluated,

actions to train servers, awareness, and dissemination of the 2030 Agenda were

reported, as well as government measures to align local planning instruments,

both strategic and medium-term, such as the PPAs, and management with the

SDGs. In addition, many interagency working groups, task forces, and commissions

have been created to enhance institutional integration and policy coherence.

The coordination of the SDGs, in general, is linked to the Mayor’s Office or

the Secretary of Planning or Finance, strengthening the notion that the SDGs are

not just an environmental or international agenda but represent a broader notion

of a sustainable development agenda that needs institutional integration. So far,

the municipality of São Paulo/SP and the State of São Paulo have established

a formal commission to govern the SDGs. Finally, monitoring and evaluation

tools were developed as in the cases of São Paulo, Niterói, and Belo Horizonte.

However, the historical shortcomings, especially in smaller municipalities,

should be highlighted in terms of human and budgetary resources and their

impacts on engagement with Agenda 2030. This issue is partially alleviated through

partnerships with other levels of government, the private sector, transnational

networks (ICLEI, UCLG), and international organizations (UNDP).

The analysis of the nine VLRs presented by Brazilian subnational entities

indicates a process under construction. There are apparent steering effects of the

2030 Agenda on the discourse of local governments as well as some advances in

institutional integration, mainly through the coordination of intersectoral working

groups, alignment with planning and management instruments, development of

monitoring and evaluation tools, but less evidence of impacts on policy coherence.

The reported initiatives on social participation and partnerships require further

investigation to assess their degree of inclusion and permanence over time.

Final remarks

SDG implementation in Brazil has fluctuated between governance without

government to an arrangement of social governance. This has occurred by building

a network to orchestrate the territorialization of the 2030 Agenda integrating

multiple levels of initiatives supported by subnational, national and international

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

19-24

agents. The leading role that some Brazilian municipalities took in describing

experiences permeated by autonomy in the conformation of local initiatives to

implement the SDGs.

Brazil’s active participation in the design of the 2030 Agenda does not imply

the country’s leadership in implementing the SDGs. The main explanation was the

lack of commitment of national leaders to the SDGs. Despite being a signatory to

UNGA Resolution 70/01, Bolsonaro’s government virtually abandoned the 2030

Agenda by dismantling the CNODS; vetoing the PPA’s alignment with the SDG;

and ignoring the targets and indicators adapted to be used in Brazilian public

policies for monitoring and evaluation. The rise of a government that was averse

to multilateralism, with anti-scientific positions, and who decided to dismantle

institutions that were responsible for implementing SDG correlated actions, has

complicated the incorporation of the 2030 Agenda in Brazil.

This turbulent situation of insufficient progress and flagrant setbacks on the

SDG implementation has triggered a social engagement to occupy this vacuum.

CSOs have been working in networks connected with local governments and

international organizations to evaluate Brazil’s performance (failure) in the

2030 Agenda. Subnational entities are also implementing the SDGs against the

national executive’s wishes. The 2030 Agenda territorialization occurred through

the initiative of regional and local associations and individual enterprises of

subnational governments and civil society organizations.

The territorialization of SDGs is recent, and the analysis of VLRs only

represents a tiny fraction of a broader process. Several initiatives developed by

Brazil were not systematized in the VLRs or under the GTSC A2030. In general,

from the cases studied, it is possible to be pessimistic regarding the limited capacity

of the 2030 Agenda to induce local transformations through sustainability; or to

be more optimistic given that it is a process under construction, with practical

and discursive impacts, followed by institutional and normative effects.

References

Abbott, Kenneth W., Steven Bernstein, and Amy Janzwood. 2020. “Orchestration.”

Chapter. In Architectures of Earth System Governance: Institutional Complexity and

Structural Transformation, edited by Frank Biermann and Rakhyun E. Kim, 233–53.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

20-24

Araújo, Ana Beatriz. 2020. “A Agenda 2030 para o desenvolvimento sustentável e o

Brasil: uma análise da governança para implementação entre 2015 e 2019. Dissertação

(Mestrado) –Instituto de Economia e Relações Internacionais, Universidade Federal

de Uberlândia.

Biermann, Frank and Kanie, Norichika. 2017. “Conclusion”. Chapter. In Governing through

goals: sustainable development goals as governance innovation, edited by Frank

Biermann and Kanie Norichika, 254-74. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, Series: Earth

system governance.

Biermann, F., Hickmann, T., Sénit, C.-A., Beisheim, M., Bernstein, S., Chasek, P., Grob, L.,

Kim, R. E., Kotzé, L. J., Nilsson, M., Ordóñez Llanos, A., Okereke, C., Pradhan, P.,

Raven, R., Sun, Y., Vijge, M. J., Van Vuuren, D., & Wicke, B. 2022. Scientiﬁc evidence

on the political impact of the Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability,

5(9), 795–800. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00909-5

Brazil. 2016. Decree No. 8,892, of October 27, 2016. Creates the National Commission

for Sustainable Development Goals. Ofﬁcial Gazette, Brasilia. http://www.planalto.

gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2016/decreto/d8892.htm. Accessed 23 Dec 2021

Brazil (2017) Volunteer National Review on the Sustainable Development Goals. Brasília,

DF: Presidency of the Republic.

Brasil. 2019. “Decreto no 9.759, de 11 de abril de 2019. Extingue e estabelece diretrizes,

regras e limitações para colegiados da administração pública federal”. Diário Oﬁcial

da União, Brasília. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2019/

decreto/D9759.htm

Cabral, Raquel, and Thiago Gehre Galvão. 2022. “Reimagining the UN 2030 Agenda by

Connecting the SDG to Culture, Art and Communication”. Revista Latinoamericana

De Ciencias De La Comunicación 21 (41):44-59.

Carlisle, Keith and Gruby, Rebecca. 2019. “Polycentric Systems of Governance:

A Theoretical Model for the Commons”. Policy Stud J, 47: 927–952.

CNODS — Comissão Nacional para os Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável.

2017. Plano de Ação 2017-2019. Brasília: CNODS, http://www4.planalto.gov.br/

ods/publicacoes/plano-de-acao-da-cnods-2017-2019

Corrêa, Priscila. 2021. “A absorção da Agenda 2030 e seus 17 Objetivos de Desenvolvimento

Sustentável pelo Judiciário brasileiro: resultados iniciais e perspectivas. Revista

Judicial Brasileira. 1, 277-300. 10.54795/rejub.n.1.86.

De Jong, Eileen and Vijge, Marjanneke. 2021. “From Millennium to Sustainable

Development Goals: Evolving discourses and their reﬂection in policy coherence

for development”. Earth System Governance, Volume 7, 2021, 100087, ISSN 2589-

8116, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2020.100087.

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

21-24

Dryzek, John S. and Pickering, Jonathan. 2019. “The Politics of the Anthropocene”.

Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198809616.001.0001.

Finnemore, Martha and Jurkovich, Michelle. 2020. “The Politics of Aspiration”.

International Studies Quarterly, 64(4): 759–769.

Galvão, Thiago Gehre. 2019. “ODS 11: Tornar as cidades e os assentamentos humanos

inclusivos, seguros, resilientes e sustentáveis”. In: Os objetivos de desenvolvimento

sustentável e as relações internacionais, Menezes, Henrique Zeferino (Org.). 1ed.

João Pessoa: EDUFPB, 2019, 209-234.

Galvão, Thiago Gehre. 2020. “The 2030 international order and the future of global

development”. Meridian 47-Journal of Global Studies, vol. 21, Brasília: University

of Brasília http://dx.doi.org/10.20889/M47e21014

Galvão, Thiago Gehre and Ceccato, Izabella. 2021. Por uma cultura dos ODS como fator

de inovação. In: Sampaio A, Silva, DR, Porém ME (Orgs) Comunicação, inovação

e organização, Salvador: EDUFBA, São Paulo: ABRAPCORP.

Galvão, Thiago Gehre; Ramiro, Rodrigo C. 2022. “2030 Agenda and SDG implementation

in Brazil: local governance by Subnational and Civil Society agents”. In Implementing

the UN Sustainable Development Goals — Regional Perspectives. World Sustainability

Series. Ed. Walter Leal Filho. https://www.springer.com/series/13384 (forthcoming)

Garcia, RT. 2021. “Census delays Threaten Latin America’s Vulnerable”. https://www.

bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-21/census-delays-threaten-latin-america-s-

vulnerable . Accessed 05 Dec 2021

Gonçalves, Verônica e Inoue, Cristina. 2017. “Governança Global: Uma Ferramenta de

Análise”. Chapter In: Brasil e o Sistema das Nações Unidas: desaﬁos e oportunidades

na Governança Global. Schmitz, G. e Rocha, R. (Orgs.). Brasília: IPEA

GTSC A2030 — Civil Society Working Group for the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda

(2017) Spotlight Report 2017. Brasilia. Disponível em: https://gtagenda2030.org.br

Guia para Integração dos Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável nos Municípios

Brasileiros — Gestão 2017-2020 — Brasília, DF: CNM, 2017.

Gupta J, Nilsson M .2017. “Toward a Multi-level Action Framework for Sustainable

Development”. Chapter. In Governing through goals: sustainable development goals

as governance innovation, edited by Frank Biermann and Kanie Norichika, 275-294.

MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, Series: Earth system governance.

Hochstetler, Kathryn. 2012. “Social Movements in Latin America”. Chapter In Routledge

Handbook of Latin American Politics, edited by Peter Kingstone; Deborah J. Yashar

Abingdon: Routledge.

IDSC. Índice de Desenvolvimento Sustentável. Disponível em: https://idsc.cidadessustentaveis.

org.br/. Acesso em: 22 mai. 2023

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

22-24

Ipea — Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada. 2018. ODS: metas nacionais dos

Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável. Brasília: Ipea

Kanie, Norichika; Bernstein, Steven; Biermann, Frank and Haas, Peter. 2017. “Introduction:

Global Governance through Goal Setting”. Chapter. In Governing through goals:

sustainable development goals as governance innovation, edited by Frank Biermann

and Kanie Norichika, 1-28. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, Series: Earth System

Governance.

Kim, Rakhyun E. 2020. “Is Global Governance Fragmented, Polycentric, or Complex? The

State of the Art of the Network Approach”. International Studies Review, Volume

22, Issue 4, December 2020, Pages 903–931, https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viz052

Kronemberger, Denise. 2019. “Os desaﬁos da construção dos indicadores ODS globais”.

Cienc. Cult., São Paulo, v. 71, n. 1, p. 40-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.21800/2317-

66602019000100012

Lago, André Aranha Corrêa do. 2006. “Estocolmo, Rio, Joanesburgo. O Brasil e as Três

Conferências Ambientais das Nações Unidas”. Brasília: FUNAG/ IRBr.

Lessa, Antônio Carlos; Becard, Danielly Ramos; & Galvão, Thiago. 2020. “Rise and

fall of triumphalism in Brazilian Foreign Policy: the international strategy of the

Workers Party´s governments (2003-2016)”. Chapter. In Status and the Rise of

Brazil: Global Ambitions, Humanitarian Engagement and International Challenges,

edited by Esteves, Paulo, Gabrielsen Jumbert, Maria, de Carvalho, Benjamin,

71-88. Palgrave Macmillan.

Lessa, Antônio Carlos; Cervo, Amado. 2014. “O declínio: inserção internacional do

Brasil (2011–2014)”. Rev. Bras. Polít. Int. 57 (2): 133-151.

McKenzie S, Fernadez DS and Wells E. 2019. “Scientist who called out Bolsonaro on

Amazon deforestation is ﬁred”. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/03/americas/

brazil-space-institute-director-ﬁred-amazon-deforestation-intl/index.html . Accessed

20 Dec 2021

MP — Ministério do Planejamento, Desenvolvimento e Gestão. 2018. “PPA 2016-2019:

relatório anual de avaliação — ano-base 2017”. Brasília: MP. https://bit.ly/3c75Wne

Nilo, Alessandra. 2016. “A participação da sociedade civil na Agenda 2030 da ONU e a

política externa brasileira: um exercício de democracia nas relações internacionais.”.

Recife: Monograﬁa, especialização em Diplomacia e Negócios Internacionais,

Faculdade Damas.

Okereke, Chukwumerije. 2019. “North-South inequity and global environmental

governance”. Chapter In Routledge Handbook of Global Sustainability Governance,

edited by Agni Kalfagianni , Doris Fuchs and Anders Hayden, 167-179. New York:

Routledge

Thiago Gehre Galvão; Rodrigo Correa Ramiro

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

23-24

Okitasari, Mahesti and Katramiz, Tarek. 2022. “The national development plans after

the SDGs: Steering implications of the global goals towards national development

planning” Earth System Governance, Volume 12, 2022, 100136, ISSN 2589-8116,

https://doi .org/10.1016/j.esg.2022.100136 .

Llanos, A.., Raven, R., Bexell, M., Botchwey, B., Bornemann, B., Censoro, J., Christen,

M., Díaz, L., Hickmann, T., Jönsson, K., Scholz, I., Scobie, M., Sun, Y., Thompson, J.,

Thwaites, J., & Yunita, A. 2022. Implementation at Multiple Levels. In F. Biermann,

T. Hickmann, & C.-A. Sénit (Eds.), The Political Impact of the Sustainable

Development Goals (1st ed., pp. 59–91). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.

org/10.1017/9781009082945.004

Orsini, Amandine; Le Prestre, Philippe; Haas, Peter M.; Brosig, Malte; Pattberg, Philipp;

Widerberg, Osca; Gomez-Mera, Laura; Morin, Jean-Frédéric; Harrison, Neil E.; Geyer,

Robert; Chandler, David. 2020. “Complex Systems and International Governance”.

International Studies Review, Volume 22, Issue 4, December 2020, Pages 1008–1038,

https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viz005

Ostrom, Eleanor. 2010. “Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global

environmental change”. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), (2010) 550–557.

Ramiro, Rodrigo. 2021. “As Agendas ODS no Plano Plurianual 2016-2019”. Boletim de

Análise Político-Institucional/Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada. — n. 1.

Brasília: Ipea

Rosenau, J. N. and Czempiel, E.O (Orgs.). 2000. “Governança sem governo: ordem e

transformação na política mundial”, Brasília: Editora UnB.

Santos, Pedro A.G. dos and Jalalzai, Farida. 2021. “Women’s empowerment and

disempowerment in Brazil: the rise and fall of President Dilma Rousseff”. Temple

University Press: Philadelphia.

Schneider, V. 2012. “Governance and Complexity”. Chapter In Oxford Handbook of

Governance, edited by Levi-Faur, D., 129-142. Oxford University Press, 2012.

Sénit, Carole-Anne and Biermann, Frank. 2021. “In Whose Name Are You Speaking?

The Marginalization of the Poor in Global Civil Society”. Glob. Policy, 12: 581-591.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12997

Singer, André. 2013. “Brasil, junho de 2013: Classes e ideologias cruzadas”. Novos

Estudos — CEBRAP. 23-40.

UCLG — United Cities and Local Governments. 2017. “Local and Regional Governments’

Report to the 2017 HLPF—1st Report: National and sub-national governments on the

way towards the localization of the SDGs.” Global taskforce of local and regional

governments, Barcelona

UN — United Nations. 2014. “Report of the open working group of the general assembly

on SDG”. UN Doc. A/68/970.

The complex governance of the 2030 Agenda and the steering effects of implementing the SDGs [...]

Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 18, n. 1, e1306, 2023

24-24

UNGA — United Nations General Assembly. 2015. “Transforming our world: the 2030

Agenda for Sustainable Development”. UN Doc. A/70/L.1, New York

UNSD — United Nations Statistics Division. 2022. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/

indicators-list/ . Accessed 27 Jan 2022

Van der Heijden, Jeroen. 2018. “City and Subnational Governance: High Ambitions,

Innovative Instruments and Polycentric Collaborations?”. Chapter In: Governing

Climate Change: Polycentricity in Action?, ed. by Andrew Jordan, David Huitema,

Harro van Asselt and Johanna Foster. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vijge, Marjanneke J., Frank Biermann, Rakhyun E. Kim, Maya Bogers, Melanie

Van Driel, Francesco S. Montesano, Abbie Yunita, and Norichika Kanie. 2020.

“Governance through Global Goals.” Chapter. In Architectures of Earth System

Governance: Institutional Complexity and Structural Transformation, edited by

Frank Biermann and Rakhyun E. Kim, 254–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press. doi:10.1017/9781108784641.012.

Young, Oran. 2017. “Conceptualization: Goal Setting as a Strategy for Earth System

Governance”. Chapter. In Governing through goals: sustainable development goals

as governance innovation, edited by Frank Biermann and Kanie Norichika, 31-52.

MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, Series: Earth system governance.