Institutions of trust: why Australia and Brazil differ in their approaches to renewable energy certification across market, governance, policy and international dimensions
Carregando...
Arquivos
Data
2025-10-31
Autores
Orientador(res)
Pereira, Susana Carla Farias
Rebelo, Rômulo Marcos Lardosa
Métricas
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Resumo
This study examines why Australia and Brazil, two major energy economies with shared commitments to the Paris Agreement, diverge in their approaches to renewable energy certification. Through a Institutional Theory lens, it investigates how each country’s certification framework, the Renewable Energy Target (RET) in Australia and the International Renewable Energy Certificate (I-REC) in Brazil, constructs legitimacy across four analytical dimensions: market design, governance and verification, policy alignment, and international positioning. Drawing on documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews with industry and policy stakeholders, the research integrates qualitative evidence from regulatory texts, sustainability reports, and national market data within the interpretive environment of Atlas.ti AI software. The analysis proceeds in two stages: within-case interpretation to trace institutional logics, followed by cross-case comparison to expose the deeper forces shaping credibility. This approach reveals that legitimacy in certification is not a static property of design, but an evolving social negotiation between rules, norms, and shared understandings of trust. Findings indicate that Australia’s RET derives its authority from the regulative pillar of institutions: legality, enforcement, and procedural consistency have transformed compliance into a durable, self-sustaining legitimacy. By contrast, Brazil’s I-REC market operates within the normative pillar, where credibility emerges through voluntary participation, reputational signalling, and alignment with global ESG frameworks. This contrast reflects two distinct pathways through which societies stabilize belief in renewable energy, one through the authority of law, the other through the persuasion of consensus. The study advances Institutional Theory by presenting evidence that energy certification systems embody adaptive, multi-scalar legitimacy rather than fixed institutional forms. Additionally, the research refines (Scott, 1995) three-pillar framework by showing how pillars coexist dynamically within the global energy transition. Practically, it offers insight into how emerging markets can design credible certification schemes that balance compliance with conviction.