The Politics of Agricultural Biotechnology in Brazil, 1995-2005:.

Viewed in comparative perspective, Brazil's regulation of agricultural biotechnology in the period 1995-2005 raises two puzzles. Why was Brazil relatively slow to permit the commercialization of genetically modified (GM) soy? And, why did Brazil develop more permissive regulatory policies after the election of President Lula, to the disappointment of some of his most important constituents? This paper argues that the explanation for Brazilian policy outcomes lies in the interplay between a constellation of societal interests (consumers, environmentalists, small and landless farmers, and agribusiness) and political institutions (weakly institutionalized parties, federalism, and malapportioned legislative bodies). The paper's point of departure is the observation that key actors in the debate about GM technology in Brazil view it as an extension of two other policy debates, those addressing land reform and the modernizing "green revolution" in agriculture. To a large degree, the political alliances behind each of these policy debates overlap. The key difference between the GM debates and the other two policy debates is the social, political, and legal backdrop in place at the time each debate began. The emergence of consumer protection legislation and consumer advocacy groups, environmental legislation and environmental groups, and the globalization of the commercial agribusiness sector and its renewed importance to the Brazilian economy set the stage for a debate about GM technology that was relatively, if imperfectly, pluralist. Appeals to consumer interests (both actual and potential) were more effective than environmentalists or small producers at convincing policy makers to enact regulations that were opposed by large agricultural interests. Brazilian federalism contributed to the pluralist nature of the GM policy debate, but malapportionment in the national congress detracted from pluralism in legislation regulating GM technology as well as other policies related to land and agriculture. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]