Contribuições das organizações sociais no enfrentamento dos impactos das energias renováveis e na resistência às assimetrias de poder em comunidades tradicionais

Abstract

The climate crisis intensifies the urgency of the energy transition, but the way it has been conducted in Brazil reveals structural contradictions. Renewable energy projects, often presented as sustainable alternatives, have reproduced historical power asymmetries when implemented in the territories of traditional communities. This study analyzed the contributions of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in addressing socio-environmental impacts and resisting the inequalities produced by the expansion of wind and solar farms along the coast of Ceará, focusing on the experiences of Amontada and Camocim. The research adopted a qualitative approach grounded in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which made it possible to understand how power relations are produced, legitimized, and contested in the discourses of companies, the State, communities, and CSOs. Fragments of speech, metaphors, modulations, and analogies were examined, highlighting the discursive strategies used either to make territorial and cultural rights invisible or to affirm them. This methodological choice enabled the analysis to capture not only the material impacts of the projects—such as land dispossession, environmental degradation, and restricted access to essential resources—but also the symbolic and identity effects that shape community resistance. The findings reveal that the resistance of traditional communities is not a rejection of the energy transition itself, but a critique of the exclusionary way in which projects are implemented. The absence of free, prior, and informed consultation, the manipulation of information, and the unfulfilled promise of economic benefits reinforce the perception that these initiatives transform territories into “sacrifice zones,” where marginalized populations bear disproportionate socio-environmental costs without fair access to benefits. In this context, CSOs emerge as central actors: they provide legal support, build solidarity networks, dispute dominant development narratives, and connect local agendas to national and international movements for environmental justice. The contribution of CSOs goes beyond mediation: by improving communities’ access to strategic information and strengthening their organizational capacities, they become vectors of political transformation. This process expands community protagonism and consolidates strategies of resistance that combine social mobilization, public protests, legal actions, and political advocacy. These practices configure a multifaceted form of resistance that is projected as a structural struggle for territorial defense and cultural recognition. In this sense, the study confirms the thesis that CSOs are fundamental to mitigating power asymmetries, enhancing resistance, and promoting more democratic debates about the future of the energy transition. The study concludes that the energy transition, to be legitimate, must be built in a participatory, democratic, and socially just way, recognizing diverse knowledge systems and the rights of historically vulnerable populations—otherwise, it will continue to reproduce inequalities and deepen exclusion. Thus, organized civil society is reaffirmed as a crucial force capable of challenging power structures, articulating resistance, and pointing towards an environmental governance that is fair, inclusive, and sustainable. This research advances by demonstrating the potential of CDA for the field of Administration and Controllership, by articulating discourse analysis with issues of socio-environmental governance and social participation. The approach highlights how corporate, institutional, and community strategies intersect in arenas of dispute, allowing Administration to understand not only organizational structures but also the discourses that legitimize or contest power practices. Despite its contributions, the research presents limitations. The focus on Amontada and Camocim restricts the generalization of the results, and the difficulty of accessing institutional and corporate data limited the direct confrontation between community discourses and official records. Nevertheless, these challenges also indicate avenues for future research: expanding the geographical scope of analysis, conducting comparative studies in other regions and countries, exploring the relationship between new energy technologies and environmental justice, and examining the growing transnational articulation of CSOs.