Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

Participation of the C20 in the G20

negotiation table bringing representativity

and legitimacy: a case study of the

Education Working Group under Brazil’s

presidency in 2024

Participação do C20 na mesa de negociações do G20

trazendo representatividade e legitimidade: um estudo de

caso do Grupo de Trabalho de Educação sob a presidência

do Brasil em 2024

Participación del C20 en la mesa de negociaciones

del G20 aportando representatividad y legitimidad: un

estudio de caso del Grupo de Trabajo de Educación bajo la

presidencia de Brasil en 2024

Andressa Pellanda1

Ana Helena Rodrigues2

DOI: 10.5752/P.2317-773X.2025v13n1p59-77

Enviado em: 29 de agosto de 2024

Aceito em: 30 de abril de 2025

A

This article examines the social participation of the C20 in the G20, focusing on

the inclusion of civil society in the group’s formal meetings through the pro-

posal of a Social G20 by Brazil during its presidency in 2024, with an emphasis

on the Education Working Group. The case study analyzes the dynamics of the

participation of C20 delegates as interlocutors in the G20, with access to discus-

sions and debates on educational policies, participating in the negotiations. The

qualitative methodology employed includes analysis of materials, discourse,

and participant research, utilizing documents and participation in the meetings

analyzed in 2024: on education professionals and the use of technology in edu-

cation. The results highlight the importance of the articulation between the C20

and the G20 to promote inclusive and sustainable educational policies, already

showing signs of impact in the formal construction of public commitments

and of enforcement mechanisms and in the content of deliberations, providing

greater representativity and legitimacy to the group, in processes that can be

deepened in case of continuation and improvement of this democratic practice.

Keywords: G20; Legitimacy; Representativity; Commitment; Enforcement.

1. Doutora em Ciências pela Universi-

dade de São Paulo, coordenadora geral

da Campanha Brasileira pelo Direito à

Educação.

2. Doutoranda em Ciências - Relações

Internacionais pela Universidade de São

Paulo.

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

R:

Este artigo examina a participação social do C20 no G20, focando na inclusão da

sociedade civil nas reuniões formais do grupo por meio de proposta de G20 So-

cial, pelo Brasil em sua presidência em 2024, com ênfase no Grupo de Trabalho

de Educação. O estudo de caso analisa a dinâmica de participação dos delegados

do C20 como interlocutores no G20, com acesso a discussões e debates sobre

políticas educacionais, participando das negociações. A metodologia qualitativa

empregada inclui análise de materiais e de discurso e de pesquisa participante,

utilizando documentos e participação nas próprias reuniões analisadas ocorridas

em 2024: sobre prossionais da educação e sobre uso de tecnologia na educação.

Os resultados destacam a importância da articulação entre o C20 e o G20 para

promover políticas educacionais inclusivas e sustentáveis, já dando sinais de

impacto na construção formal de compromissos públicos e de mecanismos de

enforcement e no conteúdo das deliberações, imprimindo maior representativi-

dade e legitimidade ao grupo, em processos que podem ser aprofundados em

caso de continuidade e aprimoramento desta prática democrática.

Palavras-chave: G20; Legitimidade; Representatividade; Compromisso; Aplicação.

R:

Este artículo examina la participación social del C20 en el G20, centrándose

en la inclusión de la sociedad civil en las reuniones formales del grupo a través

de la propuesta de un G20 Social por parte de Brasil durante su presidencia

en 2024, con énfasis en el Grupo de Trabajo de Educación. El estudio de

caso analiza la dinámica de la participación de los delegados del C20 como

interlocutores en el G20, con acceso a discusiones y debates sobre políticas

educativas, participando en las negociaciones. La metodología cualitativa

empleada incluye el análisis de materiales, discursos e investigación partici-

pante, utilizando documentos y participación en las reuniones analizadas que

ocurrieron en 2024: sobre profesionales de la educación y el uso de tecnología

en la educación. Los resultados destacan la importancia de la articulación en-

tre el C20 y el G20 para promover políticas educativas inclusivas y sostenibles,

mostrando ya señales de impacto en la construcción formal de compromisos

públicos y de mecanismos de enforcement en el contenido de las deliberacio-

nes, otorgando mayor representatividad y legitimidad al grupo, en procesos

que pueden ser profundizados en caso de continuidad y mejora de esta prácti-

ca democrática.

Palabras clave: G20; Legitimidad; Representatividad; Compromiso; Aplicación.

Introduction

Dani Rodrik (2018), in his article “Populism and the Economics of

Globalization,” argues that the economic globalization of recent decades

has been unsustainable, leading to adverse eects on politics, economics,

and society at both national and international levels. This unsustainabi-

lity has resulted in what is known as the “crisis of global liberal order.”

Rodrik notes that the broad processes of economic liberalization began

with the push for global openness following the decline of support for the

Keynesian model. The Washington Consensus (WC), formalized in 1989

by John Williamson, is regarded as a set of economic measures designed

to open and liberalize global markets. The widespread adoption of the

WC was facilitated by the consolidation of liberal democracies, the end

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

of the Cold War, and the inuence of international nancial institutions

(Rodrik, 1996; Milner, 1999; Venugopal, 2015).

Babb (2013) argues that the inuence of these institutions, along

with think tanks and scholars from the Chicago School, created a “policy

paradigm,” as conceptualized by Peter Hall (1993), in which a cohesive

group of thinkers and policymakers advocates for specic measures. This

paradigm led to specialization, expanded trade, and increased competiti-

veness but also resulted in cuts to social investments and a rise in poverty

and inequality, particularly in developing countries. According to Kahler

(2018), these issues contributed to the emergence of populist and natio-

nalist governments, as globalization came to be perceived as an elitist

project that caused more harm than good.

The global economic crisis, driven by the radicalization of libera-

lism, poses a signicant barrier to advancing international commitments

such as the 2030 Agenda. This crisis, combined with the absence of a new

paradigm, is regarded as the root cause of the crisis of liberal democracies

(Babb, 2013). Mounk (2018) emphasizes that the deconsolidation of demo-

cracies stems from the phenomena of “democracy without rights” and

“rights without democracy,” in which politics has become a “playground

for billionaires and technocrats,” echoing Hall’s (1993) concept of a “poli-

cy paradig m”.

Piketty (2013), Mott (2016), Rodrik (2018), and Norris and Inglehart

(2019) examine how economic liberalization has contributed to democra-

tic crises and the rise of authoritarian populism. Rodrik (2018) contends

that globalization has deepened divisions between capital and labor, glo-

balized and local interests, elites and the general population. Norris and

Inglehart (2019) analyze cultural shifts that have fueled the rise of natio-

nalist populism.

The crisis of democracies poses a signicant risk to human rights, as

democracies are often regarded as natural allies of these rights (Simmons,

2009). Contemporary dilemmas, including the erosion of the rule of law,

stem from the globalization of capitalism. This erosion is closely tied to

liberal values and constitutionalism, both of which are increasingly strai-

ned by global crises. The decline of liberal democracies is also linked to

the crisis of multilateralism, with direct implications for global governan-

ce. Lafer (2018) argues that the world order has shifted from a Kantian

vision of interdependence to a Hobbesian vision of anarchy.

Compounding this scenario, the international system is increasin-

gly characterized by a multitude of international institutions with over-

lapping competences, often lacking a cohesive institutional framework

or a de facto authority to mediate and resolve conicts arising from these

competing norms (Alter & Meunier, 2009). This structural fragmentation

enables actors to strategically shift the political game across dierent ins-

titutional arrangements or establish new ones that compete with existing

structures, thereby undermining the integrity of international law. As a

result, this intricate system of global processes, actors, and institutions

produces equally complex consequences.

The primary challenge posed by the complexity of the internatio-

nal regime lies not only in the preexistence and overlap of regulatory

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

frameworks but also in the absence of an agreed-upon hierarchy to resol-

ve conicts between the rules or decisions of dierent institutions. This

lack of hierarchy shapes actors’ strategies and intensies the politics of

cooperation. Both state and private actors recognize that, within a com-

plex regime, decisions made in one forum can be inuenced or undermi-

ned by policies adopted in a parallel or overlapping forum, whether at the

domestic or international level (Alter & Raustiala, 2018).

Traditional discussions on international regimes typically focus on

states and intergovernmental organizations, often overlooking the role of

non-state actors such as corporations, NGOs, and civil society coalitions.

In recent years, many scholars have emphasized the need to consider how

the overlapping and sequential nature of international commitments in-

uences the politics of cooperation and shapes actors’ decision-making

within regime complexes (Alter & Raustiala, 2018).

In this context, the decisions of the G20—comprising the world’s

20 richest nations and forming part of the regime complex of global go-

vernance and the economy—have a crucial impact on the global future

and human rights. This underscores the need to reassess decision-making

practices that exclude civil society’s demands. Consequently, the inclu-

sion of civil society groups, such as the C20, in G20 negotiations is es-

sential to ensuring meaningful representation, where diverse voices are

heard and more inclusive policies are developed, thereby enhancing both

their legitimacy and that of the group. Furthermore, in a context of mul-

tiple overlapping crises, it is imperative that the G20 review its internal

governance practices, creating a cascading eect that amplies the global

impact of its decisions.

This article focuses on Brazil’s proposal to include civil society du-

ring its presidency of the G20 in 2024, using a case study of the Education

Working Group—the rst to incorporate civil society not only as a voice

advocating for demands but also as an active participant in negotiating

commitments that year. Drawing on concepts from international politics

such as “commitment” (Simmons, 2009) and “enforcement” (Raustiala,

2002), it examines the participation of the Civil 20 (C20) at the G20 nego-

tiation table.

Methodology

To understand the process of C20 participation in the G20, this

study employed a mixed-methods approach, combining material and

discourse analysis with ethnographic research. The material analysis in-

volved examining ocial documents, political statements, and reports

from both the C20 and G20 to identify negotiation dynamics and priority

themes. The documents analyzed in this study are listed in the table be-

low. It is important to note that the nal meeting of the G20 Education

Working Group (EdWG) and its concluding declaration were not analy-

zed, as this article was prepared prior to these events.

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

Table 1. Documents from the Education Working Groups of the C20 and G20

Author Title and Document Information

C20 Education and Culture Working Group “The right to education: transform education from a

global south perspective” - Policy Paper May 2024

C20 Education and Culture Working Group

C20 Education and Culture Statement “Valuing and bui-

lding capacity of education professionals: what can we

collectively do?” / Brasilia meeting: 20-22 May 2024

C20 Education and Culture Working Group C20 Education and Culture Statement “Digital transfor-

mation and access” / Brasilia meeting: 07-10 July 2024

G20 Education Working Group

Education Working Group (EdWG) Brasilia meeting:

20-22 May 2024 Background Note “Valuing and building

capacity of education professionals: what can we collec-

tively do?”

G20 Education Working Group

Education Working Group (EdWG) Rio de Janeiro mee-

ting: 07-10 July Background Note “Digital transformation

and access”

G20 Education Working Group Annex to the Leaders’ Declaration

First Draft

G20 “G20 Rio de Janeiro Leaders’ Declaration” / Rio de

Janeiro meeting: 18-19 November 2024

Source: prepared by the authors based on documents received during the participatory

research process.

Participatory research was employed to observe interactions and

discourses in the meetings and conferences analyzed in this article, oe-

ring a deeper understanding of the practices and relationships between

C20 delegates and G20 members. This approach aligns with methodolo-

gies associated with action research or intervention research:

The term “participant” suggests the controversial insertion of a researcher into

a eld of investigation formed by the social and cultural life of another, whether

near or distant, who, in turn, is invited to participate in the research as an infor-

mant, collaborator, or interlocutor. Since the earliest ethnographic experiences,

both the researcher and the researched have, for all intents and purposes, been

subjects and objects of knowledge, and the nature of these complex relationships

has been, and continues to be, at the center of reections that shape and nuance

theoretical-methodological dierences. (...) The ideas of action or intervention

are not equivalent, but they suggest, in addition to the presence of the resear-

cher as part of the eld being investigated, the presence of another who, as they

participate in the research as an active subject, becomes educated and organized,

appropriating, for action, knowledge that is collectively constructed. (Schmidt,

2006, p. 14)

On the one hand, action research is a form of participatory resear-

ch, as it employs participant observation in conjunction with cultural,

educational, organizational, political, or other forms of action. On the

other hand, it is distinguished by its focus on the planned intervention wi-

thin the investigated context, aiming to drive change while prioritizing

the active participation of the researched group. In this study, this approa-

ch was applied through a privileged position of authorship, directly enga-

ging in social participation within the C20 processes.

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

C20 Participation in the G20

With Brazil’s presidency in 2024, the C20, for the rst time, had

the opportunity to act as a direct interlocutor in G20 discussions, gaining

space to present proposals and debate crucial issues such as education.

This inclusion reects a growing recognition of the importance of civil

society contributions in shaping more inclusive political agendas and ad-

dresses the demand for greater representativity and legitimacy within

the group in the eyes of the international community.

In this context, two key terms need to be conceptualized.

Representativity, according to Bourdieu (1991), is the capacity of an agent

or institution to embody and express the interests, values, and identi-

ties of a social group, thereby ensuring its legitimacy in the social spa-

ce. Legitimacy, in turn, as dened by Benhabib (1996), is achieved when

political decisions are made through inclusive deliberative processes in

which all stakeholders have a voice and inuence.

Thus, the C20’s participation in the G20 under Brazil’s presiden-

cy can be analyzed through these lenses. By securing a platform to

present proposals and engage in discussions, the C20 enhances its re-

presentativity, embodying the diverse demands of civil society within

global governance structures. Simultaneously, its inclusion contributes

to the legitimacy of G20 deliberations, as it aligns with the principles

of inclusive decision-making and democratic legitimacy outlined by

Benhabib.

According to the Brazilian State’s proposal for the “Social G20,” the

initiative aims to “ensure that civil society is heard in the public policy-

-making process.” The Social G20 was announced by President Lula at

the 18th G20 Summit of Heads of Government and State in New Delhi,

India, as Brazil symbolically assumed the bloc’s presidency. The ocial

G20 website indicates that more than 50 meetings involving civil society

groups were planned, and that

The objective of the Social G20 is to expand the participation of non-govern-

mental actors in the activities and decision-making processes of the G20, which,

during the Brazilian presidency, has the motto “Building a Fair World and a

Sustainable Planet.” As a plural and diverse country with the authority to address

fundamental issues such as climate change and the ght against hunger and

poverty, the Social G20 will ensure space for the dierent voices, struggles, and

demands of the populations and non-governmental agents of the countries that

make up the world’s largest economies. (G20 Social, 2024, our translation)

In this context, the proposal aims to promote spaces for the partici-

pation of the 13 engagement groups that form part of the Social G20: C20

(civil society), T20 (think tanks), Y20 (youth), W20 (women), L20 (labour),

U20 (urban), B20 (business), S20 (science), Startup20 (startups), P20 (par-

liaments), SAI20 (supreme audit institutions), and the newest additions,

J20 (supreme courts) and O20 (oceans).

This research focuses on the case of the C20, which represents civil

society. The C20 seeks to achieve positive societal outcomes based on the

principle of economic justice, advocating for eective nancial mecha-

nisms and the ecient allocation of resources to ensure that no one is left

behind. The group aims to foster dialogue with the G20 while ensuring

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

that civil society has the same level of access to governments as represen-

tatives of the economic sector.

The C20 was formalized as an ocial G20 engagement group in 2013

and has been strengthening its role each year, ensuring that world leaders

consider the recommendations and demands of organized civil society. Its

focus includes environmental protection, the promotion of social and eco-

nomic development, human rights, and the principle of “leaving no one

behind.” The C20 fullls multiple roles, including holding governments

accountable for their commitments, advocating for positive societal out-

comes, and promoting the eective allocation of resources (C20a, 2024).

The C20 seeks to establish a balance by ensuring that civil society

has the same level of access to governments as representatives of econom-

ic sectors. In a context where governments are often perceived as being

overly aligned with businesses or acting primarily in their own interests,

the involvement of civil society is essential to ensuring that government

decisions reect the interests of citizens.

The C20 plays a crucial role in the G20 process by oering inno-

vative solutions and policy recommendations to governments on key is-

sues. During the C20 Summit in Tokyo (2019), more than 800 civil society

representatives endorsed a set of principles that serve as a foundational

framework for the C20’s continued engagement, ensuring the sustain-

ability and expanding impact of its collective work.

The principles of the C20 reect its global character, serving as

a platform for civil society organizations and social movements world-

wide that seek to inuence the G20. Transparency is fundamental, re-

quiring that all drafts and decisions be widely disseminated for public

input, with all nal documents made accessible. Independence is main-

tained, as the C20 belongs exclusively to civil society and remains free

from external inuence. Collaboration is encouraged, fostering coopera-

tion with other engagement groups to amplify the C20’s impact. Human

rights and gender equality are priorities, with the C20 actively opposing

inequalities and human rights violations while promoting gender equal-

ity. Inclusivity is essential, ensuring a space for meaningful exchange

and collaboration without discrimination. Continuity guarantees that

voices from diverse regions are represented in C20 processes, while pre-

dictability ensures clear timelines and well-dened procedures.

The governance of the C20 is structured across various spheres to

ensure both eciency and representativeness. The C20 Troika serves as

a mechanism for dialogue among civil society organizations from the

previous, current, and upcoming G20/C20 host countries, fostering con-

tinuity and continuous learning. The C20 Chair and Co-Chairs are re-

sponsible for facilitating the C20 process and engaging with other G20

actors, ensuring that civil society’s concerns are eectively represented.

The C20 Sherpa functions as the primary point of contact with external

stakeholders, facilitating clear and eective communication with G20

representatives, international organizations, the media, and other G20

engagement groups.

The C20 Secretariat is responsible for administrative, nancial,

and logistical tasks, ensuring the C20 operates eciently and in an

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

organized manner. The International Advisory Committee (IAC), com-

posed of representatives from international civil society organizations,

provides strategic guidance to the C20 and supports the dissemination of

its recommendations among key stakeholders. Finally, the C20 Steering

Committee (SC) serves as the executive body, ensuring that the C20 re-

mains an open and diverse space by facilitating a broad range of civil

society perspectives and coordinating the development of recommenda-

tions as well as regular interactions between C20 working groups and

government representatives.

In Brazil, the C20 received 1,761 applications from civil society

organizations across 91 countries, extending beyond the G20 member

states and observer countries, thereby incorporating a broader and more

global set of demands3 . In 2024, the C20 was structured into ten working

groups, each representing its strategic priorities:

1. Just, Inclusive, and Anti-Racist Economies

2. Food Systems, Hunger, and Poverty

3. Environment, Climate Justice, and Just Energy Transition

4. Sustainable and Resilient Communities and Disaster Risk Reduction

5. Integrated Health for All People

6. Education and Culture

7. Digitalization and Technology

8. Women’s Rights and Gender Equality

9. Philanthropy and Sustainable Development

10. Democratic Governance, Civic Space, Anti-Corruption, and Access to Justice

Case Study: G20 Education Working Group (EdWG)

The C20 Education and Culture Working Group played a central

role in the G20 discussions, advocating for policies that promote equity

and inclusion in education while emphasizing four key priorities: (1) reg-

ulatory frameworks governing private sector involvement, particularly

in the areas of technology and education; (2) quality inputs and condi-

tions in educational institutions, including teacher training, working

conditions, and the recognition of education professionals; (3) adequate

public funding for education, primarily through state eorts supported

by tax and scal justice; and (4) education as a key driver in addressing the

climate crisis and global governance challenges (C20b, 2024).

The C20 Education and Culture Working Group in the edition an-

alyzed here was composed of 552 civil society organizations from around

the world4 . In 2024, the group’s work was structured around the theme

“The Right to Education: Transforming Education from a Global South

Perspective,” advocating for a comprehensive and inclusive review of

global educational and cultural systems through ve main pillars.

Firstly, the Governance and Sustainability pillar seeks to central-

ize the global governance of sustainable education and cultural sys-

tems, emphasizing the need for eective multilateralism that actively

involves both governments and civil society. This pillar also highlights

3. Information provided by the C20 2024

coordination team, based on internally

tabulated database records.

4. Information provided by the C20 2024

coordination team, based on internally

tabulated database records.

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

the importance of scal justice in ensuring adequate public funding for

education and culture, the integration of climate justice and environmen-

tal education into public policies, and the reinforcement of democracy,

secularism, and human rights as fundamental pillars for educational and

cultural development.

The second pillar, Inclusion and Equity, focuses on fostering great-

er inclusion and equity within educational and cultural systems. This

involves implementing adaptive public policies and inclusive infrastruc-

tures, as well as combating bullying, discrimination, and all forms of vi-

olence. Additionally, this pillar emphasizes the need for public policies

that ensure accessibility and aordability, respect cultural diversity, and

actively combat racism.

The third pillar, Digital Transformation and Accessibility, pro-

motes equitable access to information, knowledge, and digital resources.

Recognizing technology as a language and the internet as a vital space

for education and culture, this pillar seeks to advance digital literacy and

autonomy while emphasizing the need for digital public goods and al-

gorithmic transparency to ensure ethical decision-making in the use of

articial intelligence.

The fourth pillar, The Central Role of Education and Culture

Professionals, expands the recognition of these professionals beyond

their roles as educators, emphasizing their active participation in demo-

cratic governance and public policy development. This pillar highlights

the need to improve working conditions, infrastructure, salaries, and

continuous professional development, ensuring that education and cul-

ture professionals are valued and can work in environments that support

their mental well-being.

Finally, the Lifelong Learning, Holistic Growth, and Ethical Global

Citizenship pillar advocates for comprehensive and lifelong education,

emphasizing experiential learning and community engagement. This

pillar also focuses on fostering a culture of continuous learning, expand-

ing access to quality education, and integrating cultural diversity into

curricula, thereby promoting education that equips individuals for ethi-

cal and responsible global citizenship.

Each of these pillars contributes to a cohesive strategy that seeks

not only to transform the educational and cultural landscape from a

Global South perspective but also to ensure that education and culture

are recognized as fundamental pillars of sustainable, equitable, and inclu-

sive global development.

The working methodology developed by civil society within the

Working Group (WG) followed a structured sequence of meetings de-

signed to discuss and rene the policy paper. The process began on March

26, 2023, with the rst meeting held during the rst global gathering of

the entire C20 in Recife, PE, where participants focused on major themes

and key issues. The second meeting, held virtually on April 11, was dedi-

cated to segmented work sessions on specic themes.

The subsequent meeting, held on April 25, focused on discussing

the rst draft of the document, which was collectively reviewed and de-

bated in detail. The fourth meeting, on May 9, advanced to the discussion

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

of the rst consolidated version of the document, reecting progress in its

development based on previous reviews and feedback.

The fth and nal meeting, scheduled for May 23, was dedicated to

making nal adjustments to the document. Subsequently, on May 30, the

nal document was submitted by the group facilitation to the C20 coor-

dination, marking the conclusion of a collaborative development process

that spanned over two months. This structured timeline and methodolo-

gy reect an organized and systematic approach, ensuring that all contri-

butions were considered and that the nal product met high standards of

quality and consensus.

The nal policy document of the C20 Education and Culture

Working Group in 2024 underscores the need to realign education with

a human rights-based approach, aiming to foster holistic development,

social inclusion, and preparation for productive life. Its key focus areas

include global governance, sustainability, full human development, di-

gital transformation, and the central role of education professionals in

the teaching and learning process. The C20’s recommendations advocate

for reorganizing global governance into sustainable and representative

systems, promoting scal justice to secure sustainable education funding,

integrating environmental education and climate justice into public poli-

cies, and defending the principles of democracy, secularism, and human

rights as fundamental pillars of education. These principles are embe-

dded in a lifelong education framework rooted in equity and inclusion.

Based on this document, political statements were developed for the WG

co-facilitation to present in the ocial G20 debates.

The rst in-person meeting of the 2024 G20 Education and Culture

Working Group (EdWG) was held in Brasília from May 20 to 22. Co-

organized by the OECD TALIS team and the Brazilian Presidency of the

EdWG, the event focused on the professional development of educators,

emphasizing the importance of continuous training and international

work experiences as integral components of government policies for pro-

fessional development. The Background Document proposed that dele-

gates analyze national gaps, assess the limitations of continuous training,

and explore its interconnections with national policies, aiming to broa-

den the diversity and representativeness of professionals beneting from

these opportunities. Additionally, the document suggested prioritizing

continuous training and short-term programs to circumvent controver-

sial issues related to the global recognition of qualications and recom-

mended that discussions focus primarily on the public education system.

The ocial intervention of the C20 at the meeting (C20c, 2024) em-

phasized the recognition and empowerment of education professionals

as a top priority, particularly in response to the current global teacher

shortage and within the context of training and exchange programs, as

dened by the G20’s debate framework. The intervention underscored

the importance of personal and professional development in fostering

learning environments that promote sustainable development and pea-

ce. The C20’s recommendations included broadening the denition of

education and culture professionals, ensuring adequate working condi-

tions and health protections for educators, and promoting international

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

coordination for both initial and ongoing training. Additionally, the C20

highlighted the potential of the arts as a catalyst for economic and social

development.

During the meeting, several countries raised concerns extending

beyond the ocial focus on training exchanges, particularly regarding

the teacher shortage and the need to improve working conditions and

professional recognition. Among these countries were Australia, Canada,

Spain, France, Indonesia, Japan, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and

Russia, among others. Education International, representing the global

teaching profession, and UNESCO also emphasized the necessity of ad-

dressing this issue.

Seizing the opportunity provided by the broadened scope of the

debates, and in response to the Brazilian presidency’s decision not to esta-

blish a nal commitment from the Education Working Group (EdWG)—

justied as an innovation in methodology prioritizing exchanges and the

sharing of best practices over negotiated language—civil society, through

the C20 and Education International, formally demanded a minimum

commitment to society based on the exchange of experiences.

In a political statement delivered during the meeting, the C20 re-

presentation declared:

Considering such recommendations, we believe that the discussions in this

meeting, focused on valuing and building the capacity of education professionals, are

benecial, promoting spaces for international cooperation. We request that the

eorts made here can also translate into commitments to domestic policy at the respective

countries’ levels and in promoting cooperation for such eorts in other countries of the

Global South as well.

(...) Without these urgent actions, we will fail to truly value our teachers, as the-

re will be no future for them or anyone else. They are, and must be, an integral

part of our current eorts to avert this crisis. This must be part of a broader global

strategy that can only be realized with the support and leadership of the G20 nations.

Together, we can build a future where education and culture are the cornerstones

of sustainable, just, and inclusive societies. (C20c, 2024, our highlights)

Based on this proposition, which was endorsed by some mem-

bers present, the meeting’s presidency, under the Brazilian Ministry of

Education, proposed drafting a paragraph on the topic, now broadened

and anchored in existing global commitments to the right to educa-

tion. This approach aimed to facilitate the negotiation process by utili-

zing agreed-upon language, which could ultimately be adopted in the

High-Level Final Declaration of Leaders or at the G20 Interministerial

Education Meeting in 2024.

This development can be considered the rst achievement of civil

society in the negotiations, demonstrating the impact of its participatory

presence at the meeting. After group discussions, with the C20 actively

participating, the agreed-upon text submitted for nal approval at their

headquarters in the November meeting was as follows:

[We] emphasize the importance of inclusive and equitable quality universal

education in building a just world and a sustainable planet, as well as the particu-

lar importance of teaching professionals to reach this goal. [We] recognize the

importance of strategies of recruitment, retention and continuing professional

development, including opportunities for mobility and exchange, to address the

shortages of teaching professionals which exist in many G20 countries and beyond. [We]

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

further instruct our teams to continue to work to dignify, diversify and valorize

teaching professionals. (G20c, 2024, our highlights)

A comparative discourse analysis between the C20’s proposed dis-

course and the paragraph drafted by the G20 reveals that the C20’s propo-

sal advocates for a broad and transformative approach to the role of edu-

cators and cultural professionals in global education. It primarily focuses

on the challenges and training of these professionals in the Global South,

within the framework of a just and sustainable society.

The proposal underscores the need to recognize and value educa-

tion professionals not merely as instructors but as fundamental agents

of change, capable of shaping educational and cultural policies through

democratic and participatory governance. It calls for the prioritization of

continuous professional development, educators’ mental well-being, and

fair working conditions to foster learning environments that promote

sustainable development and practical problem-solving.

This discourse serves as the foundation for the commitments ar-

ticulated in the agreed-upon G20 paragraph. It rearms the critical role

of educators, recognizing the need for strategies to recruit, retain, and

develop teaching professionals to address the global teacher shortage.

This aligns with key elements of the initial discussion raised by the C20,

particularly its emphasis on valuing, diversifying, and dignifying educa-

tors as essential contributors to achieving universal and equitable qua-

lity education.

Thus, beyond civil society’s achievement in securing a formal nal

commitment among G20 countries, which will establish an enforcement

mechanism (Raustiala, 2002) for the C20, the engagement group also pla-

yed a crucial role in expanding the scope of discussions. Initially limited

to best practices in continuing education exchanges, the debate evolved

into a broader commitment addressing working conditions, ensuring the

recognition, dignity, and diversity of education professionals, and inte-

grating the issue of the teacher shortage within an inclusive, equitable,

and quality-focused framework.

The second meeting of the G20 Education Working Group (EdWG)

was held in Rio de Janeiro from July 7 to 10, 2024, focusing on the theme

“Connecting Digital Resource Platform Managers: Sharing Educational

Material on Education for Sustainable Development.” The discussions

centered on exchanging the best practices related to state-managed digi-

tal educational platforms and resources in education.

Once again, the C20’s concerns extended beyond the ocial agen-

da, emphasizing the importance of meaningful connectivity, data se-

curity, the negative impacts of the unregulated platformization of edu-

cation, and the need for regulatory frameworks governing private sector

involvement in this eld (CGI, 2024).

Thus, in its ocial intervention (C20d, 2024), the C20 emphasized

the risks associated with the privatization of education through techno-

logy, underscoring the importance of ensuring equitable access to open

and public information, digital resources, and digital inclusion. The in-

tervention also highlighted the need for robust data protection measures

and safeguards for public safety, as well as the urgent need to address the

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

negative impacts of technology-driven privatization in education, parti-

cularly the replacement of teachers with digital tools.

The recommendations of the C20 Education and Culture Working

Group included:

• Ensuring equitable access to information and digital

resources;

• Promoting collaboration through community-centered digi-

tal appropriation;

• Advancing strategies to democratize access to educational

resources;

• Ensuring human rights-centered decision-making in the im-

plementation of Articial Intelligence (AI) and algorithmic

transparency; and

• Reinforcing data protection and security principles, with

special attention to children and adolescents.

Additionally, the C20 emphasized the urgent need for a global com-

mitment to sustainable and inclusive educational and cultural systems,

grounded in global governance, scal justice, democracy, human rights,

and education for global citizenship and human rights.

The agreed-upon paragraph in the G20 is reproduced below:

[We] collectively recognize the critical importance of involving educators in the

creation and development of platforms and of digital content on Education for

Sustainable Development, while appreciating the variety and range of solutions

that already exist throughout countries in this area. [We] emphasize that appli-

cations of articial intelligence in education must be grounded in quality-assured edu-

cational content. [We] underscore that digital solutions must be developed with a

strong emphasis on diversity, equity and inclusion. (extended version) [We] recognize

the importance of involving educators and students in the creation and development of

platforms and of digital content on Education for Sustainable Development. [We]

appreciate the variety and range of learner-centric and multi-disciplinary solu-

tions that already exist throughout countries in this area, while emphasizing that

they do not replace the role of teachers. [We] consider users’ experience – in terms of

ease of access, accessibility and on how solutions try to bridge the digital divide – to

be a key element to measure success in this area. [We] observe that media/digital

literacy has become a necessary topic for education, alongside critical thinking,

emotional intelligence, human rights education and many other subjects. (G20c, 2024,

our highlights)

The G20 commitment paragraph acknowledges the importance of

engaging educators and students in the creation and development of di-

gital platforms and content for Education for Sustainable Development,

emphasizing the recognition and protection of education professionals,

who must not be replaced by technology. It highlights accessibility, diver-

sity, equity, inclusion, critical education, and human rights education as

key components of meaningful connectivity.

Furthermore, it represents a signicant step in reinforcing the need

for a commitment to ensuring that Articial Intelligence (AI) in educa-

tion is built upon high-quality educational content. These priorities re-

ect concerns raised, among others, by the C20.

However, the issues of regulation and security remain more dilu-

ted in the G20 commitment paragraph. While the commitment suggests

support for state-led development of platforms and tools, it can also be

interpreted more broadly to encompass a wider range of digital solutions.

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

Although the need to ensure quality in the use of AI is acknowledged,

security remains an implicit concern rather than a clear and explicit com-

mitment. At best, an optimistic interpretation might infer that security is

implied, but it is not explicitly stated as a rm obligation.

The EdWG’s third and nal face-to-face meeting took place in

Fortaleza from October 29 to 31, focusing on school-community enga-

gement. The discussions underscored the role of strengthened ties bet-

ween schools and communities in enhancing learning outcomes and ad-

vancing inclusive, equitable, and quality education, as well as sustainable

development. The delegates highlighted the importance of collaboration

among school leaders, educators, parents, and community organizations

in developing eective educational policies and practices. Such partner-

ships have demonstrated their potential in addressing critical challenges,

including violence, adolescent pregnancy, and mental health issues, whi-

le fostering meaningful and contextually relevant learning experiences.

Furthermore, community participation in educational decision-making

enhances accountability and transparency, ensuring that resources are

allocated eciently and that educational initiatives are responsive to stu-

dents’ needs.

The C20’s (C20e, 2024) ocial intervention emphasized the impor-

tance of centralized global governance for education and culture, structu-

red through multilateral mechanisms that ensure the active participation

of governments and civil society. The intervention also stressed the need

to integrate climate justice and sustainability into educational practices,

strengthening climate literacy and resilience, particularly in vulnerable

communities. Additionally, it advocated for scal justice as essential to

the sustainable nancing of quality education, calling for active partici-

pation in global negotiations, such as the UN Tax Convention, to secure

resources and prioritize education. Lastly, the C20 representative warned

that while innovative nancing can complement eorts, it must be regu-

lated to prevent exacerbating inequalities, as evidenced by experiences

with impact bonds and results-based approaches in low- and middle-in-

come countries.

Once again, the C20’s intervention expands on the concepts ori-

ginally presented by the EdWG of the G20, linking the school-commu-

nity engagement with the need for democratic governance at all levels

of educational decision-making. While the EdWG highlights the role of

collaboration between schools and communities in improving learning

outcomes and addressing social challenges, the C20 intervention broa-

dens this perspective by emphasizing the inclusion of civil society in glo-

bal education governance. This approach underscores that democratic

management should not be limited to decisions within schools but must

extend to the construction of education systems as a whole.

Finally, the C20’s nal intervention emphasized three essential re-

commendations for states:

1. Recognizing and valuing all education professionals in both formal and

non-formal institutions by ensuring adequate working conditions, proper

infrastructure, and access to healthcare, with a particular focus on educators’

mental well-being. This includes guaranteeing fair salaries, career progression,

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

and remuneration plans. Promoting international coordination for the initial and

continuous training of education and culture professionals by allocating human

and nancial resources for ongoing training and international exchanges.

2. Ensuring equitable access to digital resources through connectivity, digital literacy,

and autonomy, recognizing technology as a language and the internet as an

educational space. Safeguarding the ethical use of AI with transparency and ac-

countability, prioritizing public access, and regulating private sector involvement.

Protecting privacy, security, and data protection in the use of technology in education.

3. Strengthening the ties between schools and communities requires the demili-

tarization of schools. Furthermore, global evidence shows that reinforcing partici-

patory, inclusive, anti-discriminatory, and democratic governance, along with fostering

a welcoming school environment, is fundamental to eectively preventing and

combating violence in schools, including attacks and shootings. (C20e, 2024, our

highlights)

The outcomes of the three EdWG meetings were compiled and

delivered to G20 leaders. The analysis of the Leaders’ Declaration, pre-

sented at the nal G20 Leaders’ Summit in Rio de Janeiro on November

18–19, highlights the inclusion of elements introduced by the C20 during

the EdWG meetings. The most signicant aspect of the text is a dedicated

paragraph on education:

We emphasize the critical role of quality education and training, including digital

education, as an enabler for human dignity and empowerment; equity, equality,

and inclusiveness; sustainable and socio-economic growth; active citizenship, pros-

perity, peace and well-being. We note with concern the current global teacher shor-

tage. Professional development policies capable of qualifying and retaining teachers

and of stimulating the interest of early-career teachers have become an essential

component of the multidimensional challenge of preparing our societies for the

future ahead. (G20d, 2024, our highlights)

The specic paragraph agreed upon by the G20 leaders contains se-

veral elements from the paragraph suggested at the rst EdWG meeting

with the active intervention of the C20. It highlights the critical role of

quality education in building a just world and in enabling human dignity,

empowerment, equity, and sustainable growth. Additionally, it expresses

concern about the teacher shortage and the need to qualify and retain

these professionals.

The paragraph also addresses the intersection between technolo-

gy and education, a topic on which the C20 made several interventions

during the EdWG meetings, contributing to the drafting of the text pro-

duced during the group’s second meeting, as well as in the nal speech of

the C20 representative during the third meeting. Several of the elements

introduced by the C20 on this subject are reected in the specic paragra-

ph of the Leaders’ Declaration:

We acknowledge that the development, deployment and use of emerging

technologies, including articial intelligence, can provide many opportunities to

workers, but also poses ethical concerns and risks for their rights and well-being. As AI

and other technologies continue to evolve, it is also necessary to bridge digital di-

vides, including halving the gender digital divide by 2030, prioritize the inclusion

of people in vulnerable situations in the labor market, as well as ensure fairness

respect for intellectual property, data protection, privacy, and security. We agree to

advocate and promote responsible AI for improving education and health outcomes

as well as women’s empowerment. We recognize that digital literacy and skills are

essential to achieve meaningful digital inclusion. We recognize that technologies’ inte-

gration in the workplace is most successful when it incorporates the observations and

feedback of workers and thus encourage enterprises to engage in social dialogue

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

and other forms of consultation when integrating digital technologies at work.

With this in mind, we welcome the decision of G20 Labor and Employment

Ministers to establish guidelines for the safe, secure and trustworthy use of AI in the

world of work, in collaboration with other relevant workstreams. (G20e, 2024,

our highlights)

The paragraph also shares the views presented by the C20 with a

focus on the ethical considerations of AI, the need for digital literacy, the

importance of bridging digital divides, and the urgent need to ensure

security, privacy, and data protection. The C20 interventions emphasize

the importance of creating platforms and digital content with the parti-

cipation of educators and students, focusing on diversity, equity, and in-

clusion, and ensuring the accessibility and ease of use of digital solutions.

The topic was brought up in the Leaders’ Declaration, which calls for the

inclusion of workers’ feedback when integrating digital technologies in

the workplace, highlighting the importance of inclusivity and fairness in

the deployment of technologies.

Conclusions

The C20 Education and Culture Working Group played a promi-

nent role in addressing critical global education issues during the 2024

G20 discussions, marking the rst time it had a formal voice in meetings

and negotiations. This was made possible by Brazil’s initiative to formally

integrate engagement groups into the debates through the Social G20.

Comprising a vast network of 552 civil society organizations, the

C20 Education and Culture WG sought to reshape educational paradig-

ms from a Global South perspective, emphasizing education as a pillar

of sustainable and just development. Its strategy aimed to inuence de-

cision-making within the G20 Education Group, advocating for inclusive

and transformative educational policies.

Grounded in ve strategic pillars—Governance and Sustainability,

Inclusion and Equity, Digital Transformation and Accessibility, the

Central Role of Education and Culture Professionals, and Lifelong

Learning—the C20 Education and Culture Working Group proposed an

educational model that not only addresses contemporary demands for s-

cal justice, inclusion, and environmental sustainability but also reinforces

education’s fundamental role in cultivating conscious global citizenship.

Furthermore, its emphasis on valuing education professionals—by

ensuring fair working conditions and continuous professional develo-

pment—aligns with the objective of sustaining a quality and equitable

education system.

These pillars reect a holistic and integrated approach, emphasi-

zing the need for inclusive global governance and the promotion of eec-

tive multilateralism that incorporates diverse voices, particularly those

from Global South countries and representative civil society.

This social demand translates into civil society processes with a

clear political impact. The working methodology adopted by the C20,

characterized by a series of preparatory meetings and rigorous reviews of

policy documents, exemplies a commitment to democratic participation

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

and consensus-building. The culmination of this process, marked by the

submission of the nal policy document, underscores WG’s ability to

facilitate constructive dialogues that result in practical and actionable

recommendations.

The C20 played a pivotal role in the G20 discussions during the

three meetings analyzed in this article. Due to pressure from the C20 and

other organized civil society representatives present at the rst meeting,

the meeting’s presidency, under the Brazilian Ministry of Education, pro-

posed the inclusion of a paragraph on valuing educators, which was ul-

timately adopted in the 2024 EdWG High-Level Final Declaration and

reected on the G20 Leaders’ Declaration.

This paragraph underscores the importance of strategies for re-

cruitment, retention, and professional development as key measures to

address the global teacher shortage. Additionally, it arms a commit-

ment to the recognition, diversication, and dignication of education

professionals, reecting the C20’s initial advocacy to broaden the scope

of the debate and establish a clear commitment to improving working

conditions and enhancing the attractiveness of the teaching profession.

At the second meeting, focused on the theme “Connecting Digital

Resource Platform Managers: Sharing Educational Material on Education

for Sustainable Development,” the agreed-upon G20 paragraph reected

some of the C20’s concerns. It acknowledged the importance of engaging

educators and students in the creation and development of digital plat-

forms for Education for Sustainable Development and emphasized the

need for digital solutions that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Additionally, it highlighted the importance of ensuring that AI in educa-

tion is built upon high-quality educational content.

In the nal Leaders’ Declaration, the concerns raised by the C20

were also reected, with specic sections addressing the ethical use of

articial intelligence, digital literacy, the inclusion of workers in the deve-

lopment of technologies in their workplace, and a particular issue the C20

has been highlighting: the need to create guidelines for the safe, secure,

and trustworthy use of AI in the world of work, specically in education.

However, the issues of regulation and security remained more diluted.

While security was implicitly acknowledged, it was not explicitly addres-

sed as a rm commitment.

The EdWG’s third and nal meeting underscored the role of stren-

gthened ties between schools and communities in enhancing learning

outcomes and advancing inclusive, equitable, and quality education, as

well as sustainable development. The C20’s intervention went further

and linked school-community engagement with the need for democra-

tic governance at all levels of educational decision-making. Furthermore,

the C20 reinforced the need to value education professionals and ensure

adequate remuneration and training, invest in digital education, promote

the ethical use of articial intelligence in education, and ensure security,

privacy, and data protection.

In summary, the C20’s participation in the G20, through an unpre-

cedented process of genuine engagement, led to signicant commitments

regarding the recognition of educators, the promotion of an inclusive and

estudos internacionais • Belo Horizonte, ISSN 2317-773X, v. 13, n. 1, (fev. 2025), p. 59-77

equitable educational system, and the consideration of principles gover-

ning the use of digital resources in education.

However, there remains room to strengthen state commitments,

particularly in light of the extensive, in-depth, and representative work

carried out by the C20. A notable example, as highlighted in this analysis,

concerns the regulation and security of educational technology, where

commitments could be further reinforced.

The rst step toward civil society participation in G20 debates has

been taken, already demonstrating impact in terms of the adoption of for-

mal commitments and their content. This progress is expected to enhan-

ce the representativity and legitimacy of the G20 while strengthening

enforcement mechanisms available to civil society.

Future research should focus on assessing the implementation of

these commitments and ensuring not only the continuation of participa-

tory processes in future G20 editions but also the greater quantitative and

qualitative integration of social proposals into national policies.

References

ALTER, Karen J.; MEUNIER, Sophie. The politics of international regime complexity. Perspec-

tives on Politics, v. 7, n. 1, p. 13-24, 2009.

ALTER, Karen J.; RAUSTIALA, Kal. The rise of international regime complexity. Annual Review

of Law and Social Science, v. 14, p. 329-349, 2018.

BABB, Sarah. The Washington Consensus as transnational policy paradigm: Its origins, trajec-

tory and likely successor. Review of International Political Economy, v. 20, n. 2, p. 268-297, 2013.

BENHABIB, Seyla. Democracy and Dierence: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Prince-

ton: Princeton University Press, 1996.

BOURDIEU, Pierre. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991.

C20a. Website. https://c20brasil.org/pt/. 2024.

C20b. The right to education: transform education from a global south perspective. Policy Paper. May

2024.

C20c. Education and Culture Statement “Valuing and building capacity of education professionals: what

can we collectively do?”. Brasília: May 2024.

C20d. Education and Culture Statement “Digital transformation and access”. Brasilia: July 2024.

C20e. Education and Culture Statement. Fortaleza: November 2024.

CGI. Brazilian Internet Steering Committee. Education in a Platformization and Data Econ-

omy Scenario. 2024. Available at: https://cgi.br/media/docs/publicacoes/1/20220929112852/

educacao_em_um_cenario_de_plataformiza%C3%A7ao_e_de_economia_de_dados_prob-

lemas_e_conceitos.pdf. Accessed on August 13, 2024.

G20 Social. Website. https://www.g20.org/pt-br/g20-social. 2024

G20a. Background Note “Valuing and building capacity of education professionals: what can we collec-

tively do?”. Brasília: May 2024.

G20b. Background Note “Digital transformation and access”. Rio de Janeiro: July 2024.

G20c. Annex to the Leaders’ Declaration - First Draft. Brasília: August 2024.

G20d. Rio de Janeiro Leaders’ Declaration. Rio de Janeiro: November 2024.

HALL, Peter A. Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Poli-

cymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, v. 25, n. 3, p. 275-296, 1993.

LAFER, Celso. A máquina do mundo – desaos da globalidade: assimetrias da sociedade inter-

nacional. In: LAFER, Celso. Relações internacionais, política externa e diplomacia brasileira: pensa-

mento e ação. Brasília: FUNAG, 2018. p. 461-479.

Andressa Pellanda, Ana Helena Rodrigues Parcipaon of the C20 in the G20 negoaon table bringing representavity and legimacy:

a case study of the Educaon Working Group under Brazil’s presidency in 2024

MILNER, Helen V. The political economy of international trade. Annual Review of Political Sci-

ence, v. 2, n. 1, p. 91-114, 1999.

MOFFITT, Benjamin. The global rise of populism: Performance, political style and representation.

Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2016.

MOUNK, Yascha. The people vs. democracy: why our freedom is in danger and how to save it.

Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2018.

NORRIS, Pipa; INGLEHART, Ronald. Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Po-

pulism. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2019.

PIKETTY, Thomas. Le capital au XXIe siècle. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 2013.

RAUSTIALA, K. The architecture for international cooperation: transgovernmental networks

and the future of international law. 2002. Va. J. Int. Law 43:1–92.

RODRIK, Dani. Populism and the economics of globalization. Journal of International Business

Policy, v. 1, n. 1-2, p. 12-33, 2018.

SIMMONS, Beth A. Mobilizing for human rights: international law in domestic politics. New York:

Cambridge University Press, 2009.

VENUGOPAL, Rajesh. Neoliberalism as concept. Economy and Society, v. 44, n. 2, p. 165-187,

2015.