Environmental Conflict Mediation Promoted by the Inter-American Development Bank: The Case of the Banhado Community in São José dos Campos, Brazil

Since the Washington Consensus, neoliberalism has globalized as a disciplinary regime, recasting <i>accountability</i> as a core norm legitimizing multilateral development interventions. While critical scholars have examined the ideological role of accountability in neoliberal governance, few studies analyze its operationalization in concrete conflicts between international financial institutions and marginalized communities. This paper investigates how the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) employs accountability mechanisms to mediate disputes in Latin American development projects, interrogating the tensions between technocratic governance and grassroots resistance. Through a case study of the Urban Structuring Program of São José dos Campos (PEUSJC) - where infrastructure projects threatened historically settled communities - we analyze a complaint filed by social movements to the IDB’s Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism (MICI). Combining document analysis (MICI reports, IDB project appraisals, and community petitions) with semi-structured interviews of state officials, IDB staff, and affected residents, we interpret findings through Gramsci’s lens of hegemony. This approach reveals how accountability frameworks function as tools of consent-building while obscuring material power asymmetries. The study demonstrates that MICI’s accountability procedures, though framed as participatory, often prioritize institutional legitimacy over substantive redress for displaced communities. By exposing this contradiction, the research contributes to critical debates on the limits of neoliberal accountability in development practice, urging closer scrutiny of multilateral conflict-mediation mechanisms.