Climate disaster governance in Brazil and South Africa: a comparative study on national policies, community engagement and the role of litigation in exposing (and fixing) flaws

This research examines how climate litigation interacts with disaster risk governance and participatory rights in Brazil and South Africa (2015–2025). Using a comparative empirical legal methodology grounded in a risk-based case selection approach, it maps decisions from the highest courts of both countries, identifying cases through climate-related hazards such as floods, droughts, and wildfires rather than relying solely on explicit climate terminology. The findings reveal distinct judicial patterns. In Brazil, litigation more frequently adopts a structural character, challenging regulatory omissions and governance failures on constitutional environmental grounds. In South Africa, cases are predominantly reactive or reparatory, framed within administrative or delictual review, even when climate-related risks form the factual background. The study demonstrates that constitutional evolution in both countries has institutionalized environmental and participatory rights, though their judicial operationalization differs. While litigation strengthens accountability in disaster governance, its impact remains context- dependent and cannot replace structurally embedded participatory mechanisms within adaptive governance systems.