Environmental Security and Substate Governance: Evidence from the Brazilian Amazon Restricted; Files Only
Wainwright, William (Spring 2025)
Abstract
When states are unable to provide sufficient protection for nonstate groups within their territory, these groups must attempt to secure their own protection. While many elements may explain the success or failure at security provision by nonstate actors, existing research suggests that more cohesive groups, as well as groups that engage in advocacy networks with their peers, should be better able to provide their own security. Even with limited state capacity, protection by state actors also plays a major role in the security of nonstate actors. Using data on internal characteristics and legal status for indigenous territories in the Brazilian Amazon, as well as satellite data on deforestation from the PRODES monitoring program, this thesis explores the effects of federal legal protections, indigenous group cohesion, and participation in regional advocacy networks on security for indigenous territories, using the level of deforestation as a proxy for the security of a territory. The thesis includes a stacked difference-in-differences design with federal legal protection as the treatment variable, as well as correlational analysis of the cross-section data for indigenous group capability. Results indicate that state protection is the single most important driver of security for nonstate actors, with regional network participation playing a role, but internal group cohesion not predicting security effectiveness.
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Literature 3
2.1 State Capacity, Fragility, and Failure 3
2.2 Group Cohesion and Trust 7
3. A Theory of Substate and Hybrid Governance 9
3.1 The Sources of Substate Effectiveness 11
3.2 Mechanism 1: Regional Advocacy Networks 12
3.3 Mechanism 2: Group Cohesion 13
3.4 Hypotheses 14
3.5 The Case of the Brazilian Amazon 18
4. Research Design 22
4.1 Deforestation Rate 22
4.2 Federal Enforcement (H1) 25
4.3 Regional Advocacy Network Participation (H2a) 26
4.4 Internal Division (H2b) 27
5. Empirical Results 28
5.1 Enforcement Model 39
5.2 Mobilization Model 32
6. Conclusion 40
Works Cited 42
About this Honors Thesis
School | |
---|---|
Department | |
Degree | |
Submission | |
Language |
|
Research Field | |
Mot-clé | |
Committee Chair / Thesis Advisor | |
Committee Members |

Primary PDF
Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
---|---|---|---|
![]() |
File download under embargo until 22 May 2027 | 2025-04-08 20:52:53 -0400 | File download under embargo until 22 May 2027 |
Supplemental Files
Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
---|