HOW HIGH-LEVEL CAREER CIVIL SERVANTS FRAME SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38116/ppp71art5Palavras-chave:
sustainable development, sustainable development goals, SDG, frame, government, civil servantsResumo
Sustainable development (SD) and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were designed to inform public policy and drive sustainable practices. However, it is relatively unknown how high-level civil servants frame SD and the SDGs, consequently defining their scope in public policies. Frames are cognitive shortcuts derived from paradigms that guide decision-making. This study maps the relevant paradigms underlying the debate on sustainable development and their corresponding cognitive cues. Two principal axes organize these paradigms: strong versus weak sustainability and human-centric versus ecocentric. An online survey assessed how Brazilian high-level career civil servants evaluated the cognitive cues of the paradigm. Two main clusters of SD and SDG framing were identified. The first cluster (N = 51) aligns more closely with the ecological modernization paradigm, characterized by a pro-market stance and skepticism toward collective approaches and eco-ethics. The second cluster (N = 41) is more supportive of SD and the SDGs, sharing cognitive cues of societal responsibility and eco-ethics, but also strongly agreeing with frames of scarcity, the overpopulation crisis, and limits to growth. Results are discussed in consideration of the challenges of implementing Sustainable Development (SD) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) within public policies.
Downloads
Referências
ACOSTA, A. O Buen Vivir: uma oportunidade de imaginar outro mundo. In: SOUSA, C. M. (Ed.). Um convite à utopia. Campina Grande: EDUEPB, 2016. p. 203-33. Retrieved from: https://static.scielo.org/scielobooks/kcdz2/pdf/sousa-9788578794880.pdf.
ANDRADE, J. C. S.; OLIVEIRA, J. A. P. de. The role of the private sector in global climate and energy governance. Journal of Business Ethics, v. 130, n. 2, p. 375-87, Aug. 2015.
ANSELL, C.; GASH, A. Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, v. 18, n. 4, p. 543-571, Oct. 2008.
BARBIER, E. B.; BURGESS, J. C. The sustainable development goals and the systems approach to sustainability. Economics, v. 11, n. 1, 2017.
BIASUTTI, M.; FRATE, S. A validity and reliability study of the attitudes toward Sustainable Development scale. Environmental Education Research, v. 23, n. 2, p. 214-230, 2017.
BOGNER, F. X.; WISEMAN, M. Adolescents’ attitudes towards nature and environment: quantifying the 2-MEV model. The Environmentalist, v. 26, n. 4, p. 247-254, 2006.
BOULDING, K. E. The economics of the coming Spaceship Earth. In: JARRETT, H. (Ed.). Environmental quality in a growing economy. Baltimore: Resources for the Future, 1966. p. 3-14.
BRASIL. Ministério da Economia. Balanço 2019-2022: gestão das carreiras transversais. Brasília: Secretaria de Gestão, 2022. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.br/servidor/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/servidor/carreiras/gestao-estrategica/arquivos/Balanco20192022deGestaodasCarreirasTransversais.pdf.
BRUNDTLAND, G. H. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: our common future. [S. l.]: WCED, 1987. Retrieved from: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf.
BULKELEY, H.; MOL, A. P. J. Participation and environmental governance: consensus, ambivalence and debate. Environmental Values, v. 12, n. 2, p. 143-154, 2003.
CARTER, N. The politics of the environment: ideas, activism, policy. 3rd ed. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
CROWNE, D. P.; MARLOWE, D. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, v. 24, n. 4, p. 349-354, 1960.
DALY, H. E. Sustainable development: from concept and theory to operational principles. Population and Development Review, v. 16, 1990.
DALY, H. E. Sustainable development: definitions, principles, policies. Washington: World Bank, 2002.
DENHARDT, R. B.; DENHARDT, J. V. The new public service: serving rather than steering. Public Administration Review, v. 60, n. 6, p. 549-559, 2000.
DEVALL, B. The deep ecology movement. Natural Resources Journal, v. 20, n. 2, p. 299-322, Apr. 1980.
DEVELLIS, R. F. Scale development: theory and applications. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2003.
DRYZEK, J. S. The politics of the Earth: environmental discourses. 3rd ed. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2013.
DUNLAP, R. E. et al. New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm – a revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, v. 56, n. 3, p. 425-442, 2000.
ELDON, J. Processes, patterns, practices, and perspectives: what we talk about when we talk about “development”. Cogent Social Sciences, v. 3, n. 1, 2017.
ELKINGTON, J. Enter the triple bottom line. In: HENRIQUES, A.; RICHARDSON, J. (Ed.). The triple bottom line: does it all add up? London: Routledge, 2004. Retrieved from: https://www.johnelkington.com/archive/TBL-elkingtonchapter.pdf.
ESCOBAR, A. Encountering development: the making and unmaking of the third world. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012.
FOSTER, J. B. The ecology of marxian political economy. Monthly Review, v. 63, n. 4, 2011. Retrieved from: https://monthlyreview.org/2011/09/01/theecology-of-marxian-political-economy/.
GAARD, G.; GRUEN, L. Ecofeminism: toward global justice and planetary health. Society and Nature, v. 2, n. 1, 1993.
GLOBAL COMPACT. Who cares wins: connecting financial markets to a changing world. [S. l.]: United Nations, 2004. Retrieved July 7, 2022, from: https://d306pr3pise04h.cloudfront.net/docs/issues_doc/Financial_markets/who_cares_who_wins.pdf.
GOLDSMITH, E. A blueprint for survival. The Ecologist, v. 2, n. 1, 1972.
HAAS, P. M. Epistemic communities, constructivism, and international environmental politics. London; New York: Routledge, 2016.
HARDIN, G. The tragedy of the commons: the population problem has no technical solution; it requires a fundamental extension in morality. Science, v. 162, n. 3859, p. 1243-1248, 1968.
JENNINGS, B. Toward an ecological political economy: accommodating nature in a new discourse of public philosophy and policy analysis. Critical Policy Studies, v. 4, n. 1, p. 77-85, 2010.
KARAMBELKAR, S.; GERLAK, A. K. Collaborative governance and stakeholder participation in the Colorado River Basin: an examination of patterns of inclusion and exclusion. Natural Resources Journal, v. 60, n. 1, p. 1-46, 2020.
LAKOFF, G.; JOHNSON, M. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. Retrieved Nov. 4, 2023, from: http://www.bibliovault.org/BV.landing.epl?ISBN=9780226468013.
LÉLÉ, S. M. Sustainable development: a critical review. World Development, v. 19, n. 6, p. 607-621, 1991.
MAZZUCATO, M. Mission economy: a moonshot guide to changing capitalism. New York: Harper Business, 2023.
MILLER, B. K.; SIMMERING, M. J. Attitude toward the color blue: an ideal marker variable. Organizational Research Methods, v. 26, n. 3, p. 409-440, 2023.
MOE, T. M. The politics of structural choice: toward a theory of public bureaucracy. In: WILLIAMSON, O. E. (Ed.). Organization theory: from Chester Barnard to the present and beyond. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.
MOL, A. P. J.; SPAARGAREN, G. Ecological modernisation theory in debate: a review. Environmental Politics, v. 9, n. 1, p. 17-49, 2000.
NEUMAN, W. L. Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. 7th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2011.
OSBORNE, S. P. (Ed.). The new public governance? Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. London; New York: Routledge, Feb. 2010.
PETERSON, C. B.; KNOPF, R. C. (Re)framing sustainable development: an ecological posture and praxis. Community Development, v. 47, n. 1, p. 122-35, 2016.
RECKWITZ, A.; ROSA, H. Late modernity in crisis. Medford: Polity Press, 2023.
ROBÈRT, K.-H. et al. A compass for sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, v. 4, n. 2, p. 79-92, 1997.
RUGGERIO, C. A. Sustainability and sustainable development: a review of principles and definitions. Science of The Total Environment, v. 786, 10 Sept. 2021.
RYAN, K.; GANNON-SLATER, N.; CULBERTSON, M. J. Improving survey methods with cognitive interviews in small – and medium – scale evaluations. American Journal of Evaluation, v. 33, n. 3, p. 414-430, 2012.
SCHLOSBERG, D. Theorising environmental justice: the expanding sphere of a discourse. Environmental Politics, v. 22, n. 1, p. 37-55, 2013.
TAYLOR, D. E. The rise of the environmental justice paradigm: injustice framing and the social construction of environmental discourses. American Behavioral Scientist, v. 43, n. 4, p. 508-580, 2000.
WALDO, D. Development of theory of democratic administration. American Political Science Review, v. 46, n. 1, p. 81-103, Mar. 1952.
WEBER, H.; WEBER, M. When means of implementation meet Ecological Modernization Theory: a critical frame for thinking about the Sustainable Development Goals initiative. World Development, v. 136, Dec. 2020.
COMPLEMENTARY BIBLIOGRAPHY
BLÜHDORN, I. The governance of unsustainability: ecology and democracy after the post-democratic turn. Environmental Politics, v. 22, n. 1, p. 16-36, 2013.
DAVIDSON, P. Oil conservation: theory vs. policy. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, v. 2, n. 1, p. 145-149, 1979.
LEOPOLD, A. A Sand County almanac and sketches here and there. London: Oxford University Press, 1968.
ROBERT, K. W.; PARRIS, T. M.; LEISEROWITZ, A. A. What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environment: science and policy for sustainable development, v. 47, n. 3, p. 8-21, Apr. 2005.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2025 Alguns direitos reservados
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:
Autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY), permitindo o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria do trabalho e publicação inicial nesta revista.
Autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (ex.: publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
Autores com trabalhos aprovados têm permissão e são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (ex.: em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal) a qualquer momento durante o processo editorial (com a devida observação de aprovado e em fase de publicação), já que isso pode gerar alterações produtivas, bem como aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado.
A PPP não paga royalties de direitos autorais. Os nomes de seus autores são resguardados até a publicação online. Não há proibição na reprodução/cópia dos textos; entretanto, é necessário que seja citada a fonte quando da citação e/ou divulgação total ou parcial das matérias publicadas. Caso não seja cumprida esta orientação, o editor, em nome do Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (Ipea), fará uma advertência por escrito àquele que desrespeitou este regulamento.
Todo o conteúdo publicado pela PPP em Revista está licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional.
