Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Brazil Content Type Policy Brief

1. The New Development Bank’s Contribution to the Energy Transition Process in the BRICS Countries (2016-2023)

Author:
Maria Elena Rodriguez, Rafaela Mello Rodrigues de Sá, Octávio Henrique Alves Costa de Oliveira, and Renan Guimarães Canellas de Oliveira
Publication Date:
12-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
BRICS Policy Center
Abstract:
Considering the growing relevance of the Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) in the task of financing the global energy transition process, it is important to understand the efforts of these institutions to establish projects aimed at reducing carbon emissions in the most diverse sectors of the economy, and especially in the energy sector. This document looks specifically at the role that the New Development Bank (NDB) plays in this process, presenting an overview of its loan portfolio and targets in terms of contributions to the energy transition process. The NDB, also known as the BRICS Bank, stands out in its institutional strategies in the area of Clean Energy, one of its operational objectives, setting a target for the year 2026 of directing 40% of all its financing to projects aimed at climate change, including operations that contribute to the energy transition (NDB, 2022a, p. 28).
Topic:
Development, Banks, BRICS, Energy Transition, and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Iran, Indonesia, India, South Africa, Brazil, Ethiopia, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates

2. Beyond projects: the role of development partners in institutionalizing renewable energy innovations: lessons from the Global South

Author:
Lea Elsässer, Harald Fuhr, Anna Fünfgeld, Markus Lederer, Aparajita Banerjee, and HyunAh Yi
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Renewable energy has seen rapid uptake, particularly in the Global South. Solar energy projects have boomed in recent years, but uptake by countries is uneven. Beyond geophysical conditions, technological innovation, market dynamics and donor-driven “lighthouse projects”, political institutionalization has played a critical role in decarbonization. In this policy brief, which is based on extensive research from Global South case studies, we argue that political institutionalization is key to determining whether and how innovative solar initiatives become stabilized, scaled up, and mainstreamed. Drawing on the research project Institutionalizing Low Carbon Development in the Global South (INLOCADE) and expert contributions from a follow-up IDOS workshop, this policy brief synthesizes comparative policy-relevant findings on how institutionalization unfolds in various emerging economies of the Global South, including Brazil, Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia and South Africa. Key messages: • Political institutionalization – understood here as an enduring change of formal and informal rules and practices towards low-carbon development – ​​is essential for making renewable energy projects sustainable by embedding them in conducive, stable governance frameworks. Isolated, donor-driven initiatives are at risk of provoking resistance and backlash, and of fading away once external support ends. • Multiple pathways for institutionalization exist. State leadership, subnational action, alliances between development partners and communities, and crisis-driven coalitions can enable institutionalization under different conditions. Policies should be tailored to the institutional realities of each context rather than using one-size-fits-all models. Similarly, development partners should assess local realities and adapt their strategies accordingly. • Distributive justice and participation must be actively supported. Political institutionalization can lead to inequitable outcomes and reinforce exclusionary practices. Development partners should take a proactive role by aligning their interventions with inclusive and equitable approaches to ensure support for marginalized groups leads to socially just transitions, not just box-ticking. • Crises can be opportunities. Energy shortages and climate shocks can disrupt fossil-fuel lock-ins and open the door to innovation. Development partners need flexible instruments and strategies to help translate crisis-driven experiments into durable institutional change. • Development partners are catalytic, not deci-sive. They can accelerate change by providing finance, technical expertise, and legitimacy, especially when working with domestic actors beyond national governments. German and EU development cooperation should place greater emphasis on strengthening domestic institutional environments, including regulatory stability, administrative capacity, and actor coalitions that embed projects in lasting policy and organizational change. This helps ensure donor interventions contribute to sustained low-carbon transitions beyond initial project cycles.
Topic:
Development, Global South, Innovation, and Renewable Energy
Political Geography:
Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, South Africa, Brazil, and Cambodia

3. Industrial Activity, State Capacity, and Deforestation: Evidence from Brazil

Author:
Daniel Da Mata, Mario Dotta, and Edson R. Severnini
Publication Date:
06-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Most developing countries struggle with limited state capacity, which hinders their ability to enforce laws and provide public goods. This limitation affects many aspects of governance, including environmental regulation, and can lead to increased deforestation and land degradation. However, policies that outsource state functions to market players—when public and private incentives are aligned—may partially address these challenges by harnessing the private sector’s reach and efficiency.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, Deforestation, Livestock, and State Capacity
Political Geography:
Brazil and South America

4. The geopolitics of critical minerals and implications for Brazil and Canada

Author:
Igarapé Institute
Publication Date:
05-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Igarapé Institute
Abstract:
Critical minerals have moved from the margins of industrial policy to the center of geopolitical competition. Cobalt, copper, lithium, nickel, graphite, and rare earths now underpin three strategic imperatives: energy transition, digital infrastructure, and defense readiness. As rivalry between the United States and China intensifies, and as China leverages its dominance in processing, governments are reshaping supply chains through new alliances and targeted policy interventions. Brazil and Canada are central to this emerging mineral order. Both countries combine strong geological endowments with institutional capacity and diplomatic reach. Canada brings diversified extraction, growing midstream ambitions, and a coordinated policy approach reinforced during its 2025 G7 presidency. Brazil brings vast reserves and a more assertive industrial strategy aimed at moving up the value chain and reducing reliance on raw material exports. Yet both face the same structural challenge: transforming resource abundance into lasting economic and geopolitical influence. China’s dominance in processing reflects decades of accumulated technological capability, specialized expertise, and industrial learning—not simply subsidies. Closing this gap requires sustained investment in midstream capacity, particularly in refining, chemical conversion, and skilled labor. This article examines the forces shaping the global minerals landscape, including demand dynamics, supply chain vulnerabilities, and the evolving toolkit of geoeconomic competition. It analyzes how major powers are structuring alliances and how Brazil and Canada are positioning themselves within this shifting architecture—both individually and as potential partners. It concludes by outlining pathways for bilateral and regional cooperation, from building a Canada-Brazil midstream corridor and aligning standards to investing in human capital and strengthening regional infrastructure. The window for action is narrowing: as the institutional framework of mineral security takes shape, countries that move early and strategically will help define the rules of the system rather than adapt to them.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, Geopolitics, Lithium, Supply Chains, Rare earth elements (REEs), Energy Transition, and Critical Minerals
Political Geography:
Canada, Brazil, and South America

5. Diversifying Partnerships: What Are the Motives Behind the South Korean President’s Tour of Latin America?

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
08-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
South Korean President Lee Jae-myung visited three Latin American countries — Brazil, Chile, and Argentina — his first such visit since assuming office in June 2025. The trip formed part of a broader 11-day foreign tour, held from July 24 to August 3, 2026, that also took him to San Francisco and Frankfurt. During his stops in Latin America, Lee held summit talks with his counterparts from the three countries, focused on expanding trade and investment, opening new markets, resuming negotiations on a free trade agreement between Korea and the “Mercosur” bloc, updating the free trade agreement with Chile, and expanding the horizons of Korean diplomacy toward the Global South.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Global South, and Trade
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, Latin America, and Chile

6. Navigating Disagreement: Why Did the Brazilian President Visit the United States?

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
05-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
On May 6, 2026, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva traveled to Washington at the invitation of U.S. President Donald Trump, seeking to strengthen bilateral relations. The visit coincided with mounting domestic pressures on the Brazilian president, following a series of successive setbacks—most notably a vote by more than two-thirds of Congress members in favor of legislation proposing to reduce sentences handed down against former President Bolsonaro, despite the presidential veto, and the Senate’s rejection of da Silva’s nominee for the Supreme Court—the first time in decades that a president’s choice for the Court had been turned down. Those reverses gave fresh momentum to Bolsonaro’s son as a leading presidential contender in the 2026 elections, even as da Silva’s capacity to advance his domestic agenda showed signs of strain. Complicating the picture further were a number of unresolved Brazilian-American tensions, set against a turbulent international and regional backdrop marked by escalating U.S.–Chinese competition in Latin America, a dynamic that rendered the visit a practical test of Brazil’s ability to balance its rapprochement with Washington against its commitments to Beijing within the BRICS framework. Against that backdrop, the analysis that follows traces the most significant points of friction in Brazilian-American relations in recent times, examines the motives behind the visit and its anticipated outcomes, and assesses the potential repercussions for the wider region.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, Donald Trump, and Lula da Silva
Political Geography:
Brazil, South America, and United States of America

7. Structural Misalignment and the Limits of Pressure: Trump and Brazil’s 2026 Election

Author:
Andre Pagliarini and Feliciano de Sá Guimarães
Publication Date:
09-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
A conservative wave is spreading across Latin America. Since 2025, Chile, Bolivia, Peru, Colombia, and Honduras have elected right-wing governments that have all largely deferred to President Trump. Now attention turns to the Oct. 4 election in Brazil, a neck-and-neck race in the region’s largest country. On the surface, a victory by right-wing candidate Flávio Bolsonaro would suggest Brazil will align with Trump administration policies. But Brazil’s diverse commercial relations and commitment to regional leadership complicate this narrative. Washington should temper its expectations and recognize potential structural conflicts between US priorities — especially exclusionary policies toward China — and Brazil’s national interests. Throughout the 20th century and into the 21st century, Brazilian governments of all ideological persuasions have consistently resisted perceived subordination to the US. Regardless of who wins the presidency, we should expect Brazil to continue prioritizing national sovereignty. Ignoring this reality threatens to place the US and Brazil on a collision course, potentially harming both nations. Brazil has increasingly attempted to triangulate its foreign policy with the United States and China. As Brazil’s largest trading partner, China is essential to Brazil’s economic standing, making decoupling from China unrealistic. The Trump administration should accept this reality and refrain from economic coercion aimed at forcing Brazil to cut ties with China. Coercive pressure on this or other issues would stoke nationalistic fervor across Brazil’s ideological spectrum — a reaction Washington would also provoke by meddling in the election process. The United States should refocus diplomacy on security. It should lean into collaborative efforts to crack down on cartel violence in Brazil, which are broadly popular among Brazilians. Brazil should, in turn, reassure the United States that it has no intention to expand its relationship with China into a military partnership. Such security collaboration, paired with these reassurances, would let Brazil triangulate between the world’s two superpowers, putting its sovereignty in service of its citizens’ security and its economic vitality. Cooperation between the United States and Brazil is possible if either Bolsonaro or Lula wins. But it would require each country to recognize the structural differences that exist between them and reach understandings accordingly. As a self-described nationalist, Trump should understand Brazil’s sovereigntist instincts and pursue a diplomatic path consistent with both his administration’s security aims in the Western Hemisphere and Brazil’s vital interests.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Elections, Donald Trump, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
Brazil, South America, North America, and United States of America

8. Friendshoring Copper: A New Pillar of the U.S.-Brazilian Economic Partnership

Author:
Gracelin Baskaran, Meredith Schwartz, and Bryan Harris
Publication Date:
09-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
Brazil holds some of the world’s largest reserves of critical minerals, including niobium, rare earths, graphite, manganese, bauxite, zinc, and lithium. However, the next frontier is copper, which now accounts for one-third of all mineral exploration investment in the country. Market enthusiasm for Brazil’s copper aligns with a global outlook in which copper demand is projected to nearly double by 2035. China has already secured a strong foothold in Brazil’s mining ecosystem through trade agreements, concessional financing, and infrastructure investments. By contrast, the United States remains in the early stages of building a minerals partnership with Brazil. Unlocking Brazil’s potential as a major copper producer—and securing U.S. access to this strategic metal—will require bilateral efforts. Brazil must strengthen geological mapping, expand infrastructure, and streamline its overly bureaucratic permitting system. On the U.S. side, deploying strategic financing, promoting vertical supply chain integration, and offering targeted tariff exemptions to advance national and economic security objectives will be critical to a successful partnership.
Topic:
Economics, Partnerships, Mining, Trade, Economic Security, Copper, and Friendshoring
Political Geography:
Brazil, South America, North America, and United States of America

9. Brazil’s split worlds: Navigating between the Global South and the United States

Author:
Lauri Tahtinen
Publication Date:
07-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
Brazilian foreign policy, traditionally nonpartisan, is increasingly shaped by domestic political divides, complicating alignment with global powers. This also fuels unpredictability, especially in relation to the United States. Brazil’s political right is looking to align with Washington in a bipolar world order, while its political left still seeks multipolarity through the Global South and with the help of the Global East. If, contrary to many expectations and current Brazilian policy, the world becomes bipolar, Brazil may be forced to pick sides, challenging its tradition of balanced diplomacy. If the world appears to be heading towards multipolarity, this would fulfil a long-held Brazilian foreign policy objective. However, Brazil faces regional dynamics that, perhaps paradoxically, resemble bipolarity, as South America remains only a secondary, or even tertiary, zone for great power competition. Hosting major forums like the G20, BRICS, and COP30 puts pressure on Brazil to deliver more consistent global messaging, limiting its room for strategic flexibility.
Topic:
Global South, Multipolarity, Strategic Autonomy, Great Powers, and Middle Powers
Political Geography:
Brazil, South America, Latin America, North America, and United States of America

10. BRICS+: an Odd Family of (un)Likely Frenemies

Author:
Bart Dessein and Jasper Roctus
Publication Date:
07-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
On June 13, 2025, the government of Brazil, in its capacity as pro tempore BRICS(+) Chair, announced the formal admission of Vietnam as a partner country of the group. With this, Vietnam became the tenth BRICS+ partner country, after Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Uganda, and Uzbekistan had obtained this status in 2024. This Policy Brief aims to assess the significance of the BRICS+ framework as a whole, with particular emphasis on the role and positioning of Vietnam’s partnership within the context of the increasingly dynamic and contested geopolitical landscape that the European Union (EU) is presently faced with.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, European Union, Geopolitics, and BRICS
Political Geography:
Brazil, Vietnam, and South America