**1. Introduction**

The foreign policy of the Initiative for the Integration of the Regional Infrastructure of South America (IIRSA) is one of the key instruments for repositioning South American countries in an environment of global change [1, 2]. In this context, IIRSA emerged as an initiative of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) in August 2000, in partnership with the Andean Development Corporation (CAF) and the River Plate Basin Financial Development Fund (Fonplata), based on a proposal of the then President of Brazil, Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC), at the First Summit of South American Presidents (2000).

Originally launched by presidents of neoliberal affiliation (e.g., Andres Pastrana – Colombia; Fernando De la Rua – Argentina; Fernando Cardoso – Brazil); IIRSA was subsequently supported by the governments of progressive orientation (e.g., Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru, Chile). In December 2004, the twelve participant Presidents confirmed their commitment to IIRSA initiatives during the Cuzco meeting, approving the "Consensual Implementation Agenda for 2005-2010" that selected the priority projects to be concluded in 2010.

In that sense, when IIRSA was created, there was a scenario determined by the Washington Consensus that outlined a neoliberal agenda. It recommended (with intense pressure from multilateral lending agencies and developed countries) the privatization of state companies, deregulation of the economy, and unilateral liberalization of the foreign trade in Latin American countries [1, 3, 4]. The declared goals of IIRSA were:

"To promote the development of the regional infrastructure within a framework of increasing competitiveness and sustainability, in order to generate the necessary conditions to achieve a stable, efficient and equitable development pattern in the region; identifying the necessary physical, regulatory and institutional requirements and seeking implementation mechanisms that promote physical integration at the continental level" [5].

IIRSA was conceived to execute the regional integration based on ten "integration hubs" based on territorial planning. Four of them pass through the Amazon Region - comprehending all territories located in the Amazon River basin's watershed area. From a geopolitical perspective, this definition includes the following Amazonian countries: Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname, and Venezuela. Thus, in Latin America, Brazil acting as a global player [6, 7], together with the Amazon countries, performed the regional dynamics coordination where IIRSA project integration occurred.

This chapter discusses the regional integration in the initial phase implemented by IIRSA in the period between the years 2013 and 2014, as well as the positioning of the integration projects concerning the environmental regulation created by the Amazonian countries highlighting the role played by the sustainability concept regarding the existing environmental regulation. The IIRSA adopted a model of integration encompassing a reduction of natural resources stock, a strategic feature for long term sustainable development policies. The central question that this article wants to answer is: How the implementation of the IIRSA integration projects affected the governance of the sustainability and environmental agenda in the Brazilian Amazon?

The study associates the analysis of the IIRSA Project hubs related to Brazilian Amazon areas and the neodevelopmentalism to understand this economic policy's impacts in the Brazilian environmental scenario [7, 8–14]. The empiric reference of this study, the IIRSA Project, is considered a material expression of the development strategies executed by the Latin American political elites from 2011 to 2014 when an accelerated implementation of the IIRSA took place.

This chapter is organized into three sections: The first one describes the neodevelopmentalism approach and the recent reflections on the post-neoliberal period in the Brazilian Amazon Region. The second section presents the issues related to environmental regulation and sustainability as an arena of interest in the Amazon region. The last section describes and analyzes Amazon's IIRSA projects, the place of the environmental agenda, and the Brazilian foreign policy role in this context.

#### **2. Neo-developmentalism and the pan-Amazonian context**

The neo-developmentalism supports its interpretation in the governmental strategies assumed by the Latin American governments post-Consensus of Washington, being the broader goals of this strategy summarized by the generic term "macroeconomic" [15, 16]. The tactics are focused on the combination of stability, which includes inflation control, exchange rate and balance of payments, fiscal sustainability, low-interest rates, and reduction of uncertainties related to future demand, which should provide a more stable environment for investment decisions of these governments [12, 13].

**185**

*Neo-Developmentalism and Regional Integration: IIRSA Impact in the Environmental Agenda…*

The achievement of these goals would require complementary actions of monetary, fiscal, exchange, and wage policies [8–11], aimed at restoring state power to control the currency, facilitate policy implementation, promote competition, and support improvements in income distribution [8, 11, 15]. Also, the adoption of a development strategy that allows domestic firms to seize global economies of scale, and infrastructure and technological updating processes, supported by innovation policy and an activist trade policy targeted at strong intellectual property regimes and investment opportunities for domestic firms. These elements entail a commitment to mobilizing all available labor resources, increasing productivity in each industry, and the steady transfer of finance to high wage and high value-added

However, neo-developmentalism government strategies insisted on the implementation of neoliberal policies. The politicians conceived the Brazilian economy from 2003 to 2016 as potentially underutilized due to unrealized productivity gains that could be captured through infrastructure development and economic growth. This approach turned areas as Amazon in economies of scale; consequently, opening the region via state support to higher private-sector investment (shifting workers of lower productivity), and expanding the participation in foreign markets

The beginning of the XXI century represented a set of global changes, including socialist-oriented governments in many South American countries, which gained influence in the regional political landscape. This was evidenced by the general elections' electoral results in Venezuela, Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador in the first decade of 2000. Programmatically, the elected candidates in these countries had left-wing programs in which the environmental agenda was associated with other electoral strategies based on developmental actions whose legitimacy was based on popular acclaim. The Latin American leaderships, as elected, combined developmentalism policies not considering environmental problems accrued from development strategies and relegated sustainability to a

The IIRSA implementation plan did not have a strong administrative and operational bureaucratic body at the multi-local levels. Consequently, after the delay of the integration agendas, some organizational changes occurred at the bureaucratic level in each of the involved territories, and administrative instances emerged to correct systemic inefficiencies in the execution of several projects. In response, the Brazilian government - as the IIRSA paymaster in Latin America - created the South American Council for Infrastructure and Planning (COSIPLAN) to coordinate and accelerate the IIRSA and the developmental premises of leftist governments in the Pan-Amazon countries. The implementation of IIRSA was developing by hubs, and this was how developmentalism politicians could associate diplomatic issues with

Four of the ten IIRSA hubs of action were located in the Amazon territory. Among these, the Peru-Brazil-Bolivia hub concentrates much of the internationalization of the Madeira Complex. From the total IIRSA projects for this area, twenty-one are related to ports and waterways works; twelve to roads; three to works in seaports; five to air transportation and border crossings, and the other two deal with electrical interconnection for various hydroelectric power plants built along the Madeira River. The hubs materialize this complexity and demonstrate the magnitude of the integration and the coordination problems arising from this

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93983*

as a government goal [7, 17, 18].

secondary policy level [19, 20].

the necessities of implementation.

supranational proposal, as seen in **Figure 1**.

**2.1 IIRSA: Regional integration and developmentalism tool**

sectors.

*Neo-Developmentalism and Regional Integration: IIRSA Impact in the Environmental Agenda… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93983*

The achievement of these goals would require complementary actions of monetary, fiscal, exchange, and wage policies [8–11], aimed at restoring state power to control the currency, facilitate policy implementation, promote competition, and support improvements in income distribution [8, 11, 15]. Also, the adoption of a development strategy that allows domestic firms to seize global economies of scale, and infrastructure and technological updating processes, supported by innovation policy and an activist trade policy targeted at strong intellectual property regimes and investment opportunities for domestic firms. These elements entail a commitment to mobilizing all available labor resources, increasing productivity in each industry, and the steady transfer of finance to high wage and high value-added sectors.

However, neo-developmentalism government strategies insisted on the implementation of neoliberal policies. The politicians conceived the Brazilian economy from 2003 to 2016 as potentially underutilized due to unrealized productivity gains that could be captured through infrastructure development and economic growth. This approach turned areas as Amazon in economies of scale; consequently, opening the region via state support to higher private-sector investment (shifting workers of lower productivity), and expanding the participation in foreign markets as a government goal [7, 17, 18].

#### **2.1 IIRSA: Regional integration and developmentalism tool**

The beginning of the XXI century represented a set of global changes, including socialist-oriented governments in many South American countries, which gained influence in the regional political landscape. This was evidenced by the general elections' electoral results in Venezuela, Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador in the first decade of 2000. Programmatically, the elected candidates in these countries had left-wing programs in which the environmental agenda was associated with other electoral strategies based on developmental actions whose legitimacy was based on popular acclaim. The Latin American leaderships, as elected, combined developmentalism policies not considering environmental problems accrued from development strategies and relegated sustainability to a secondary policy level [19, 20].

The IIRSA implementation plan did not have a strong administrative and operational bureaucratic body at the multi-local levels. Consequently, after the delay of the integration agendas, some organizational changes occurred at the bureaucratic level in each of the involved territories, and administrative instances emerged to correct systemic inefficiencies in the execution of several projects. In response, the Brazilian government - as the IIRSA paymaster in Latin America - created the South American Council for Infrastructure and Planning (COSIPLAN) to coordinate and accelerate the IIRSA and the developmental premises of leftist governments in the Pan-Amazon countries. The implementation of IIRSA was developing by hubs, and this was how developmentalism politicians could associate diplomatic issues with the necessities of implementation.

Four of the ten IIRSA hubs of action were located in the Amazon territory. Among these, the Peru-Brazil-Bolivia hub concentrates much of the internationalization of the Madeira Complex. From the total IIRSA projects for this area, twenty-one are related to ports and waterways works; twelve to roads; three to works in seaports; five to air transportation and border crossings, and the other two deal with electrical interconnection for various hydroelectric power plants built along the Madeira River. The hubs materialize this complexity and demonstrate the magnitude of the integration and the coordination problems arising from this supranational proposal, as seen in **Figure 1**.

*Ecosystem and Biodiversity of Amazonia*

goals of IIRSA were:

at the continental level" [5].

tion where IIRSA project integration occurred.

In that sense, when IIRSA was created, there was a scenario determined by the Washington Consensus that outlined a neoliberal agenda. It recommended (with intense pressure from multilateral lending agencies and developed countries) the privatization of state companies, deregulation of the economy, and unilateral liberalization of the foreign trade in Latin American countries [1, 3, 4]. The declared

"To promote the development of the regional infrastructure within a framework of increasing competitiveness and sustainability, in order to generate the necessary conditions to achieve a stable, efficient and equitable development pattern in the region; identifying the necessary physical, regulatory and institutional requirements and seeking implementation mechanisms that promote physical integration

IIRSA was conceived to execute the regional integration based on ten "integration hubs" based on territorial planning. Four of them pass through the Amazon Region - comprehending all territories located in the Amazon River basin's watershed area. From a geopolitical perspective, this definition includes the following Amazonian countries: Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname, and Venezuela. Thus, in Latin America, Brazil acting as a global player [6, 7], together with the Amazon countries, performed the regional dynamics coordina-

This chapter discusses the regional integration in the initial phase implemented by IIRSA in the period between the years 2013 and 2014, as well as the positioning of the integration projects concerning the environmental regulation created by the Amazonian countries highlighting the role played by the sustainability concept regarding the existing environmental regulation. The IIRSA adopted a model of integration encompassing a reduction of natural resources stock, a strategic feature for long term sustainable development policies. The central question that this article wants to answer is: How the implementation of the IIRSA integration projects affected the governance

The study associates the analysis of the IIRSA Project hubs related to Brazilian Amazon areas and the neodevelopmentalism to understand this economic policy's impacts in the Brazilian environmental scenario [7, 8–14]. The empiric reference of this study, the IIRSA Project, is considered a material expression of the development strategies executed by the Latin American political elites from 2011 to 2014

This chapter is organized into three sections: The first one describes the neodevelopmentalism approach and the recent reflections on the post-neoliberal period in the Brazilian Amazon Region. The second section presents the issues related to environmental regulation and sustainability as an arena of interest in the Amazon region. The last section describes and analyzes Amazon's IIRSA projects, the place of the environmental agenda, and the Brazilian foreign policy role in this context.

The neo-developmentalism supports its interpretation in the governmental strategies assumed by the Latin American governments post-Consensus of Washington, being the broader goals of this strategy summarized by the generic term "macroeconomic" [15, 16]. The tactics are focused on the combination of stability, which includes inflation control, exchange rate and balance of payments, fiscal sustainability, low-interest rates, and reduction of uncertainties related to future demand, which should provide a more stable environment for investment

of the sustainability and environmental agenda in the Brazilian Amazon?

when an accelerated implementation of the IIRSA took place.

**2. Neo-developmentalism and the pan-Amazonian context**

decisions of these governments [12, 13].

**184**

**Figure 1.** *Map of the IIRSA hubs. Source: GEOSUR, 2018.*

#### **2.2 Integration projects in the Amazon and environmental regulation**

The lack of environmental regulation coordination among the Amazonian countries is notorious in dealing with transboundary water resources management issues. In this regard, an integrated analysis of environmental regulations for the Amazon detects absences and impossibilities of consolidated regulatory arrangements for effective cooperation in the region [21]. This fact certainly has had an impact on the possibility of developing infrastructure on a sustainable basis, as in Amazonian areas, the command and control instruments used by environmental regulation norms have systemic efficiency limits.

In addition to the increasing environmental deregulation in the Brazilian political scenario, IIRSA became an effective instrument for government interests in expanding jobs and increasing economic growth rates and market agents seeking to ensure their investment return in electoral campaigns. An example of this deregulation is the Bill N° 1876/1999, which "provides for Areas of Permanent Preservation, Legal Reserve, forest exploitation and other measures" approved in 2013. According to their environmental licensing situation, **Table 1** shows the infrastructure projects in the four IIRSA integration hubs located in the Amazon region.

Of the total 191 projects, 54.5% do not comply with environmental licensing norms. Noteworthy are many unlicensed waterway and railroad projects in the Amazon Hub: 18 of 27 projects, i.e., 66.6% of those in the same condition. Another situation worth mentioning is the hydroelectric plants and fiber optic transmission lines, mostly found without environmental licenses.

The data presented in the 2013 and 2014 reports - organized in **Table 2** - show the projects' typology. Systematized data of each type of integration show the infrastructure projects' situation according to the execution stage and the environmental license condition. The environmental licenses were obtained only for 45.5% of the projects, and several of them are still being executed or are at the pre-execution stage without an environmental license.

**187**

**Projects** **Peru-Brazil-Bolivia**

**Licensed**

Ports and bridges

Waterways and railways

Roads and border crossings

Hydroelectric plants and fiber optic

transmission lines

Airport and logistics centers

**Total**

**%** **Table 1.**

03 **15** **60.0**

**40.0** *Created by the authors. Source: IIRSA – Data Bank of COSIPLAN Project Portfolio (http://iirsa.org/proyectos/Principal.aspx).*

*Projects of the IIRSA hubs in the Amazon, according to their environmental licensing (EL) condition - 2013 and 2014.*

**35.0**

**65.0**

**39.0**

**61.0**

**51.5**

**50.8**

**45.5**

**54.5**

**10**

**07**

**13**

**32**

**50**

**33**

**31**

**87**

**104**

00

00

00

03

07

02

00

08

07

02 04 03 03

02

00

02

01

00

03

08

07

12

06

03

06

11

12

25

19

42

43

00

00

01

09

18

0

01

13

20

02

04

04

08

13

03

03

17

22

**Not licensed**

**Licensed**

**Not licensed**

**Licensed**

**Not licensed**

**Licensed**

**Not licensed**

**Licensed**

**Not licensed**

**Guyanas**

*Neo-Developmentalism and Regional Integration: IIRSA Impact in the Environmental Agenda…*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93983*

**Total**

**IIRSA hubs in Amazonian territories**

**Amazon**

**Andean**

The data presented in **Tables 1** and **2**, and **Figure 2**, indicate the fragility of the regulatory actions undertaken at the beginning of the implementation of


**Table1.** *Projects of the IIRSA hubs in the Amazon, according to their environmental licensing (EL) condition - 2013 and 2014.*
