@Article{RajãoNCDMSSRVBNL:2022:RiFaCo,
author = "Raj{\~a}o, Raoni and Nobre, Antonio Donato and Cunha, Evandro L.
T. P. and Duarte, Tiago Ribeiro and Marcolino, Camilla and Soares
Filho, Britaldo and Spavorek, Gerd and Rodrigues, Ricardo R. and
Valera, Carlos and Bustamante, Mercedes and Nobre, Carlos Afonso
and Lima, Let{\'{\i}}cia Santos de",
affiliation = "{Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)} and {Instituto
Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE)} and {Universidade Federal
de Minas Gerais (UFMG)} and {Universidade de Bras{\'{\i}}lia
(UnB)} and {Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)} and
{Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)} and {Universidade
Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)} and {Universidade de S{\~a}o
Paulo (USP)} and {Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)}
and {Universidade de Bras{\'{\i}}lia (UnB)} and {Instituto
Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE)} and {Universidade Federal
de Minas Gerais (UFMG)}",
title = "The risk of fake controversies for Brazilian environmental
policies",
journal = "Biological Conservation",
year = "2022",
volume = "266",
pages = "e109447",
note = "{Pr{\^e}mio CAPES Elsevier 2023 - ODS 15: Vida terrestre}",
keywords = "Brazilian Forest Code, Contrarians, Denialism, Environmental
policy-making in Brazil, Environmental public policy, False
controversies in science.",
abstract = "Fake controversies have influenced policy making on health and
environmental issues for decades, resulting in major
implementation setbacks worldwide. As a case study, in this paper
we examine fake controversies produced by a small group of active
Brazilian researchers that have seriously impacted environmental
conservation, particularly in issues related to deforestation and
climate change. Based on the literature, we develop a typology of
strategies deployed in fake controversies, which include
manufacturing uncertainty, misusing scientific credentials, and
disregarding scientific literature. Afterwards, we examine the
influence of this group of contrarians at the National Congress.
We then analyze the fake controversies promoted by these
contrarians and argue that, to properly understand them, we need
to consider a strategy so far overlooked in the literature: the
manufacture of pseudo-facts, namely, affirmations at odds with the
established literature but that strives to appear as scientific
facts. Unlike other contexts, in which contrarians have mainly
sought to cast doubt on consensual issues by arguing that there
are still considerable uncertainties surrounding them, in Brazil
pseudo-facts on deforestation have been produced and published
outside the peer-reviewed literature. We conclude the study with
recommendations on how to oppose fake scientific controversies
that threaten environmental conservation in general.",
doi = "10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109447",
url = "http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109447",
issn = "0006-3207",
language = "en",
targetfile = "rajao_2022_fake.pdf",
urlaccessdate = "29 jun. 2024"
}