Recent literature on democratic backsliding shows how authoritarian populist leaders reshape policymaking by weakening institutions and dismantling policies. In Brazil, Bolsonaro’s presidency (2019–2022) was marked by systematic attacks on science, targeting higher education and the scientific community. This article investigates the strategies Bolsonaro used to weaken science, adopting a descriptive and mixed-methods approach: analysis of budgetary data from the Integrated Planning and Budget System, documentary evidence from the National Union of Faculty of Higher Education Institutions, and content analysis of all presidential speeches. Findings reveal a dual strategy: (a) weakening the public science infrastructure and an attack on university autonomy; and (b) discursive attacks that framed universities as sites of denied scientific consensus and subordinated science to political projects. The Brazilian case shows that policy dismantling under authoritarian populism combines material retrenchment and discursive delegitimization, using attacks on science to weaken institutions and reshape policymaking during democratic backsliding.
AlmeidaR (2019) Bolsonaro presidente: Conservadorismo, evangelismo e a crise brasileira. Novos Estudos CEBRAP38: 185–213.
2.
AvantD (2024) The role of description. In: JenniferCGoodmanSW (eds) Doing Good Qualitative Research. Oxford University Press, pp.49–360.
3.
BauerMWJordanAGreen-PedersenC, et al. (eds) (2012) Dismantling Public Policy: Preferences, Strategies, and Effects. Oxford University Press.
4.
BauerMWKnillC (2012) Understanding policy dismantling: An analytical framework. In: BauerMWJordanAGreen-PedersenC, et al. (eds) Dismantling Public Policy: Preferences, Strategies, and Effects. Oxford University Press, pp.30–51.
5.
BauerMWKnillC (2014) A conceptual framework for the comparative analysis of policy change: Measurement, explanation and strategies of policy dismantling. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice16(1): 28–44.
6.
BauerMWBeckerS (2020) Democratic backsliding, populism, and public administration. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance3(1): 19–31.
7.
BauerMWPetersGPierreJ, et al. (2021) Democratic Backsliding and Public Administration: How Populists in Government Transform State Bureaucracies. Cambridge University Press.
8.
BecherTTrowlerP (2001) Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines, 2nd edn.Open University Press/SRHE.
9.
BertholiniF (2022) Brazil: “We are all going to die one day”. In: NilsRRennóL (eds) Populists and the Pandemic: How Populists Around the World Responded to Covid-19. Routledge, pp.45–62.
10.
BertholiniFFernandezMMaiaB, et al. (2025) Subnational governments, populism, and public health policy: The role of Brazilian states during the COVID-19 pandemic. Revista de Administração Pública59(6): e2025–0038.
11.
BorgesARennóL (2021) Brazilian response to Covid-19: Polarization and conflict. In: FernandezMMachadoC (eds) COVID-19’s Political Challenges in Latin America. Springer, pp.9–22.
12.
BorgesAVidigalR (2023) Introdução: Para entender a nova direita brasileira. In: Borges A and Vidigal R (eds) Para entender a nova direita brasileira: Polarização, populismo e antipetismo. Zouk, pp.11–30.
13.
Brasil (1995) Lei nº 9.192, de 21 de dezembro de 1995. Altera dispositivos da Lei no 5.540, de 28 de novembro de 1968, que regulamentam o processo de escolha dos dirigentes universitários. Presidência da República. Available at: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/LEIS/L9192.htm (accessed 3 June 2026).
14.
CardosoJCSilvaFABde AguiarMF, et al. (eds) (2022) Assédio institucional no Brasil: Avanço do autoritarismo e desconstrução do Estado, 1st edn. Associação dos Funcionários do Ipea/EDUEPB.
15.
CavalcantePLC (2023) Dirigindo na contramão: Expansão e desmonte da política de inovação no Brasil. In: GomideAde Sá e SilvaMMichelleL, et al. (orgs) Desmonte e reconfiguração de políticas públicas (2016–2022). Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (Ipea), pp.287–314.
16.
ChatterjiAHansenTBJaffrelotC (eds) (2019) Majoritarian State: How Hindu Nationalism Is Changing India. Oxford University Press.
17.
ChavesVAraújoR (2022) The neo-conservative attack on Brazil’s federal universities. International Journal of Higher Education8: e022045.
18.
de VriesW (2024) Dismantling science and technology policies in Mexico. In: MoraisMGomideA (eds) Public Policy in Democratic Backsliding: How Illiberal Populists Engage with the Policy Process. Palgrave Macmillan, pp.139–158.
19.
EsenBGumuscuS (2025) How to fight Turkey’s authoritarian turn. Journal of Democracy36(3): 106–120.
20.
FerigatoSFernandezMAmorimM, et al. (2020) The Brazilian government’s mistakes in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet396(10263): 1636.
21.
FernandezM (2022) Uso de evidência científica para tomada de decisão diante da pandemia da COVID-19: Uma aproximação à atuação do Ministério da Saúde. In: KogaNMPalottiPLMMelloJ, et al. (eds) Políticas públicas e uso de evidências no Brasil. Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (Ipea), pp.653–671.
22.
FernandezMMachadoC (2021) What are the political challenges of COVID-19 in Latin America? In: FernandezMMachadoC (eds) COVID-19’s Political Challenges in Latin America. Springer, pp.1–5.
23.
GollustSENaglerRHFowlerEF (2020) The emergence of COVID-19 in the US: A public health and political communication crisis. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law45(6): 967–981.
24.
GomesSSegattoCI (2024) Credit-claiming and nondecision-making as an ideological agenda: Did Bolsonaro succeed in changing education policies in Brazil? In: SátyroN (ed.) Social Policies in Times of Austerity and Populism: Lessons from Brazil. Routledge, pp.233–256.
25.
GomideAde Sá e SilvaMLeopoldiMA (orgs.) (2023) Desmonte e reconfiguração de políticas públicas (2016–2022). Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (Ipea).
26.
GramachoWGTurgeonM (2021) When politics collides with public health: COVID-19 vaccine country of origin and vaccination acceptance in Brazil. Vaccine39(19): 2608–2612.
27.
GramachoWGTurgeonMFernandezM (2024) E quando ainda não há vacina? A importância dos hábitos de uso de mídia na adesão a intervenções não farmacológicas durante a COVID-19 no Brasil. JCOMAL7(2): A01.
28.
HallalPC (2021) SOS Brazil: Science under attack. Lancet (London, England)397(10272): 373–374.
29.
HunterWPowerTJ (2019) Bolsonaro and Brazil’s illiberal backlash. Journal of Democracy30(1): 68–82.
30.
KindstonePPowerTJ (eds) (2017) Democratic Brazil Divided. University of Pittsburgh Press.
31.
KogaNMKarruzAPPalottiPLM, et al. (2023) When bargaining is and is not possible: The politics of bureaucratic expertise in the context of democratic backsliding. Policy and Society34(4–5): 437–452.
32.
LevitskySZiblattD (2018) How Democracies Die. Broadway Books.
33.
LewandowskySEckerUKHCookJ (2017) Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition6(4): 353–369.
34.
LottaGSAlvesIFernandezM, et al. (2022) A resposta da burocracia ao contexto de retrocesso democrático: Uma análise da atuação de servidores federais durante o Governo Bolsonaro. Revista Brasileira de Ciência Política (40): e266094.
35.
LottaGSilveiraMCFernandezM (2023) Ações e reações: Mecanismos de opressão à burocracia e suas diferentes estratégias de reação. In: Gomide A, de Sá e Silva M and Leopoldi MA (orgs.) Desmonte e reconfiguração de políticas públicas (2016–2022). Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (Ipea), pp.501–527.
36.
LynchCCassimiroPH (2022) O populismo reacionário: Ascensão e legado do bolsonarismo. Editora Contracorrente.
37.
MacielEFernandezMCalifeK, et al. (2022) A campanha de vacinação contra o SARS-CoV-2 no Brasil e a invisibilidade das evidências científicas. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva27(3): 951–956.
38.
MahoneyJThelenK (2010) A theory of gradual institutional change. In: MahoneyJThelenK (eds) Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. Cambridge University Press, pp.1–37.
39.
MassudaADall’AlbaRChioroA, et al. (2023) After a far-right government: Challenges for Brazil’s unified health system. Lancet401(10380): 886–888.
40.
MedeNGSchäferMS (2020) Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science. Public Understanding of Science29(5): 473–491.
41.
MedeirosABertholiniFPereiraC (2021) Identity versus fear of death: Political polarization under the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. In: FernandezMMachadoC (eds) COVID-19’s Political Challenges in Latin America. Springer, pp.133–145.
42.
MertonRK (1973) The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. University of Chicago Press.
43.
MilhoranceC (2022) Policy dismantling and democratic regression in Brazil under Bolsonaro: Coalition politics, ideas, and underlying discourses. Review of Policy Research39(6): 752–770.
44.
MoatKALavisJNAbelsonJ (2013) How contexts and issues influence the use of policy-relevant research syntheses: A critical interpretive synthesis. The Milbank Quarterly91(3): 604–648.
45.
MoraisMGomideA (2024a) The policy process in democratic backsliding: A proposed framework of analysis. In: MoraisMGomideA (eds) Public Policy in Democratic Backsliding: How Illiberal Populists Engage with the Policy Process. Palgrave Macmillan, pp.1–36.
46.
MoraisMGomideA (eds) (2024b) Public Policy in Democratic Backsliding: How Illiberal Populists Engage with the Policy Process. Palgrave Macmillan.
NicholsT (2017) The Death of Expertise. Oxford University Press.
50.
NiederlePPetersenPCoudelE, et al. (2023) Ruptures in the agroecological transitions: Institutional change and policy dismantling in Brazil. The Journal of Peasant Studies50(3): 931–953.
51.
NordMLundstedtMAltmanD, et al. (2024) Democracy Report 2024: Democracy Winning and Losing at the Ballot. V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg.
52.
NorrisPInglehartR (2019) Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge University Press.
53.
OliveiraVFernandezM (2021) Políticas de saúde no governo Bolsonaro: Desmonte e negacionismo. In: AvritzLKercheFMaronaM (eds) Governo Bolsonaro: Retrocesso democrático e degradação política. Editora Autêntica, pp.113–128.
54.
OreskesNConwayEM (2010) Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Climate Change. Bloomsbury Press.
55.
PeciAAvellanedaCNSuzukiK (2021) Governmental responses to COVID-19 pandemic. Revista de Administração Pública55(1): 1–11.
56.
PeciAGonzalezCIDussauge-LagunaM (2022) Presidential policy narratives and the (mis)use of scientific expertise: Covid-19 policy responses in Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico. Policy Studies44(1): 68–89.
57.
PereiraCMedeiroABertholiniF (2020) O medo da morte flexibiliza perdas e aproxima polos: Consequências políticas da pandemia da COVID-19 no Brasil. Revista de Administração Pública54(4): 952–968.
58.
PetersBGPierreJ (2019) Populism and public administration: Confronting the administrative state. Administration & Society51(10): 1521–1545.
59.
PetersBGPierreJ (2022) A typology of populism: Understanding the different forms of populism and their implications. Democratization27(6): 928–946.
60.
PielkeRAJr (2007) The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge University Press.
61.
PiersonP (2000) Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review94(2): 251–267.
62.
ProctorRN (2012) Golden Holocaust: Origins of the Cigarette Catastrophe and the Case for Abolition. University of California Press.
63.
UrbinatiN (2019) Me the People: How Populism Transforms Democracy. Harvard University Press.
64.
YesilkagitK (2018) Bureaucracy under authoritarian rule: Autonomy and resilience of administrative institutions in divided times. In: Structure and Organization of Government 2018 Conference: Bureaucracy in Divided Times, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, 20–21 June 2018.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
