Development For Whom?: The Most Important Election You’ve Never Heard Of

 Maria Catarina explains the significance of the Brazilian election in October for the 200 million residents of Brazil, as well as for the rest of the world.

Brazil’s 2026 elections are a turning point in the nation’s history. The first round will take place on 4 October, with a possible second round on 25 October, and more than 158 million people are eligible to vote. Brazilians will choose the president and state governors, but they will also renew the entire Chamber of Deputies and two-thirds of the Senate. Congress is hugely significant; the next president will depend on it to make decisions about social policy, public spending, Indigenous rights and environmental protection. 

This election may also mark the end of the “Lula” era. At 80, the incumbent President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, known ubiquitously by the moniker Lula, is seeking a fourth non-consecutive term after winning in 2002, 2006 and 2022. He remains the main figure on the Brazilian left. Flávio Bolsonaro is now the main candidate of the political movement built around his father. The conservative firebrand ex-President Jair Bolsonaro is ineligible and serving a prison sentence after being convicted of attempting to overturn the 2022 election, which he lost. The Bolsonaros are known for rhetoric which has been labelled as polarising and fearmongering. As this is the first presidential election since the attacks by far-right mobs on the Brazilian capital on the 8 January 2023, it is an important test of Brazil’s commitment to democracy and respect for electoral results. 

To be honest, I do not evaluate the candidates as if I were politically neutral. I care most about workers’ rights, social protection, public services, inequality and democracy. Lula’s history means something to me. He came from a working-class background and the trade-union movement, and his governments expanded Bolsa Família, a social security fund that is vital to millions of Brazilians’ livelihoods, raised the minimum wage and widened access to education. I also support his proposals to reduce working hours without cutting wages and to protect platform workers. Still, my support for the Workers’ Party is not unconditional. It has made compromises with traditional elites and supported projects linked to agribusiness and extractive industries. Coming from the Amazon region, I am cautious when these projects are presented as development. We must return to the question: development for whom? 

I would describe my experience with Brazilian politics as complex and often contradictory. Brazil has democratic institutions and a Constitution that guarantees extensive social rights, but there is still a considerable distance between those formal rights and what many people experience in practice. Politics is not something abstract: decisions made at the municipal, state and federal levels directly influence whether people can access healthcare, education, housing, sanitation and other fundamental rights. 

Corruption and clientelism remain recurring problems across different levels of government. However, corruption is not solely the individual misconduct of politicians. Brazilian politics is also characterised by profound inequalities in political influence and by close relationships between public authorities and private economic interests. As a result, particular business priorities can be presented as the national interest through promises of development, investment and job creation, while questions about who benefits, who bears the social and environmental costs, and who participates in decision-making receive much less attention.

In communities affected by poverty and social vulnerability, political actors may exploit people’s dependence on underfunded or inaccessible public services. Short-term promises, personal favours and emotionally charged campaigns can take the place of sustainable public policies. Political campaigns also frequently rely on simplified narratives, polarisation and misinformation rather than encouraging a serious discussion about long-term solutions. 

This should not be interpreted as a failure of individual voters. Unequal access to quality education, civic education and reliable information affects people’s opportunities to assess political proposals, hold their representatives accountable and — importantly — affects how vulnerable they are to misinformation, stoking polarisation. Material insecurity also influences political participation. People who are concerned about food, employment, housing or access to healthcare do not always have the same time, resources or access to decision-makers as more privileged groups. This creates a cycle in which those who depend most on effective public policy can have the least influence over how it is designed. 

The consequences of these inequalities remain visible across Brazilian society. According to IBGE, 23% of the Brazilian population, approximately 48.9 million people, was living in poverty in 2024, still a large figure despite significant decreases in previous years.

At the same time, I would not define my experience with Brazilian politics only through corruption or disappointment. Brazil also has an active civil society, strong social movements, democratic participation and institutions capable of producing meaningful progress. My experience has therefore made me critical, but not entirely pessimistic. The central challenge is to strengthen transparency, accountability and civic education, ensure that public services are treated as rights rather than political favours, and create meaningful opportunities for affected communities to participate in the decisions that shape their lives. 

This election is extremely significant because decisions made in Brazil directly affect the Amazon, the Cerrado, Indigenous territories and the global climate. A return of the Bolsonaro political project is concerning because his government weakened environmental protections and treated Indigenous rights and environmental regulation as obstacles to economic growth. Lula’s government has taken important steps to reduce deforestation and rebuild environmental institutions, but this election cannot be understood simply as a choice between one candidate who protects nature and another who destroys it. The composition of Congress will also determine how much any government can achieve. 

Although I am closer to Lula and labour-oriented parties, I do not believe that governments on the left should be exempt from criticism. After hosting COP30, Brazil wants to present itself as an international climate leader, but there are still contradictions between this discourse and projects involving oil exploration, agribusiness, mining, railways and waterways in environmentally sensitive regions. This is why we must ask: development for whom, and at whose expense? Promises of investment, economic growth and employment should not be used to justify environmental destruction or exclude Indigenous peoples and local communities from decisions affecting their territories. The significance of this election is therefore whether Brazil will continue to treat nature mainly as a resource to be exploited or recognise environmental protection as inseparable from human rights, social justice and the possibility of a liveable future. The Amazon rainforest is near a “tipping point” that could precipitate its collapse, which would cause it to release its stored carbon into the atmosphere. This would be devastating for the global climate.

The Amazon is often presented as a source of natural resources, economic growth and national development, while many communities in the region still experience precarious access to healthcare, education, sanitation, secure employment and infrastructure. This has taught me to question political promises of development by asking who will benefit, who will bear the social and environmental costs, and whether the affected communities will have any real influence over the decisions. 

This is why democracy must extend beyond voting and include strong trade unions, social movements, independent journalism and meaningful community participation. Although Lula’s social justice and environmental policies are important, they must also be held accountable when they compromise with powerful economic interests. Despite these concerns, I remain hopeful because Brazil has a strong history of collective organisation and resistance in defence of democracy, social rights and human dignity.