ArticlePDF Available

The End of Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Government commitments and market transitions lay the foundation for an effort to save the forest and reduce carbon emission.
No caption available
… 
Content may be subject to copyright.
4 DECEMBER 2009 VOL 326 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org
1350
POLICYFORUM
Brazil has two major opportunities to
end the clearing of its Amazon for-
est and to reduce global greenhouse
gas emissions substantially. The fi rst is its for-
mal announcement within United Nations cli-
mate treaty negotiations in 2008 of an Amazon
deforestation reduction target, which prompted
Norway to commit $1 billion if it sustains prog-
ress toward this target ( 1). The second is a wide-
spread marketplace transition within the beef
and soy industries, the main drivers of defor-
estation, to exclude Amazon deforesters from
their supply chains ( 2) [supplementary online
material (SOM), section (§) 4]. According to
our analysis, these recent developments fi nally
make feasible the end of deforestation in the
Brazilian Amazon, which could result in a 2 to
5% reduction in global carbon emissions. The
$7 to $18 billion beyond Brazil’s current bud-
get outlays that may be needed to stop the clear-
ing [a range intermediate to previous cost esti-
mates ( 3, 4)] could be provided by the REDD
(Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and
Forest Degradation) mechanism for compen-
sating deforestation reduction that is under
negotiation within the UN climate treaty ( 5), or
by payments for tropical forest carbon credits
under a U.S. cap-and-trade system ( 6).
Deforestation History
Brazil has been the world leader in tropical
deforestation, clearing an average of 19,500
km2/year from 1996 to 2005. This forest con-
version to pasture and farmland released 0.7 to
1.4 GtCO2e (billion tons of CO2 equivalents)
per year to the atmosphere ( 7) (SOM, § 1). In
2008, the Brazilian government committed to
reducing deforestation to 20% of the histori-
cal (1996–2005) rate by 2020 ( 8) (SOM, § 2),
motivated by plummeting rates of forest clear-
ing. From July 2005 to July 2009, deforesta-
tion declined to 36% of its historical levels
(see fi gure, above). To help achieve this reduc-
tion, Brazil expanded the network of Amazon
protected areas from 1.26 to 1.82 million km2;
the network now contains 51% of the region’s
remaining forest area ( 9) (table S4). Federal
campaigns to publicize and cancel credit for
illegal land holdings, to pressure buyers of
Amazon products, and to imprison illegal
operators may have contributed to the decline,
as did a retraction of the region’s cattle and soy
industries (SOM, § 3, and fi g. S1).
Steps to End Deforestation
For Brazil to build upon its success and end
deforestation, even if the profi tability of Ama-
zon cattle ranching and soy farming soar in
the coming years, it must support low-defor-
estation livelihoods for forest peoples and
smallholder farmers, expand the law-abiding
“responsible” fraction of the cattle and soy
sectors, improve law enforcement, and effec-
tively manage protected areas.
Indigenous groups and traditional forest
communities, totaling 420,000 people, have
defended their perimeters from incursions by
deforesters ( 9, 10), but have never received
compensation for this enforcement service.
There are also 400,000 smallholder farms
(up to 100 ha) ( 11) established in forested or
marginal lands that could shift to low-defor-
estation production systems.
Cattle ranching, associated with four-fi fths
of Amazon deforestation, must stabilize and
intensify on a diminishing area of pasture-
land, ceding space to a modest expansion of
relatively lucrative soy production (SOM, §
3). Support within the cattle and soy sectors
for declining deforestation could be strength-
ened by identifying, rewarding, and expanding
The End of Deforestation in the
Brazilian Amazon
ENVIRONMENT
Daniel Nepstad,
1 ,2 ‡ Britaldo S. Soares-Filho,
3 ‡ Frank Merry,
1 ,2 * André Lima,
2 Paulo Moutinho,
1, 2
John Carter,
4 Maria Bowman,
1, 2 † Andrea Cattaneo,
1 Hermann Rodrigues,
3 Stephan Schwartzman,
5
David G. McGrath,
1 ,2,6‡ Claudia M. Stickler,
1 ,2,7 Ruben Lubowski,
5 Pedro Piris-Cabezas,
5 ,8
Sergio Rivero,
6 Ane Alencar,
2 ,7 Oriana Almeida,
2 ,6 Osvaldo Stella
2
Government commitments and market
transitions lay the foundation for an effort
to save the forest and reduce carbon emission.
PHOTO CREDIT: ISTOCKPHOTOS
*Present address: Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation,
Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA.
†Present address: University of California, Berkeley,
Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
‡Authors for correspondence. E-mail: dnepstad@whrc.org
and britaldo@csr.ufmg.br
1Woods Hole Research Center, Falmouth, MA 02540, USA.
2Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazonia, Brasília-DF
71.503-505, Brazil. 3Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais,
Belo Horizonte, MG 31270-901, Brazil. 4Aliança da Terra,
Goiânia, GO 74.670-600, Brazil. 5Environmental Defense
Fund, Washington, DC 20009, USA. 6University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL 32611–7315, USA. 7Universidad Rey Juan
Carlos, Tulipán s/n, 28933, Móstoles, Spain. 8Universidade
Federal do Pará, 66.075-110, Belém, Pará, Brazil.
Average annual deforestation, 1996–2005
Projected deforestation
(Business-as-usual)
Brazilian government target
Target to end deforestation
Historical deforestation
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
Yea r
Area (103 km2/year)
Historical deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon and future deforestation under three scenarios.
The fi rst scenario simulates deforestation from 2005 into the future under business-as-usual conditions that
assume economic trends and governance levels through 2003 ( 14). The intermediate curve is the current
deforestation reduction target of the Brazilian government ( 8), and the lower curve, which ends deforestation
in 2020, is the scenario analyzed here (SOM, § 2).
Published by AAAS
on December 3, 2009 www.sciencemag.orgDownloaded from
www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL326 4 DECEMBER 2009 1351
POLICYFORUM
the pool of “responsible” producers striving to
comply with the law and to practice good land
stewardship. Legal compliance could be facili-
tated through approval and implementation of
land-use zoning plans, which lower the legal
forest reserve requirement on private proper-
ties in farming and ranching regions ( 12). This
requirement was abruptly raised from 50 to
80% of each property in 1996 without effec-
tive mechanisms for facilitating compliance
( 2) (SOM, § 6). The substantial fl ow of fed-
eral farm credit could be redirected toward the
intensifi cation of cattle production and sup-
port for forest-based economies (SOM, § 7).
Market exclusion of deforesters ( 2) could be
strengthened through government measures
that penalize companies and banks that indis-
criminately do business with Amazon farmers
and cattle ranchers.
Some farmers and ranchers will need
compensation for the opportunity costs
incurred in maintaining private forests. Five
landholder compensation qualifi cation cri-
teria could be used, including forest cover
beyond 50% of the property (SOM, § 6).
What Will It Cost and Who Will Pay?
We estimated the potential cost of a 10-year
program for ending deforestation (see fi g-
ure, page1350). Using spatially explicit eco-
nomic models and programmatic estimates,
we assess budgetary costs of ending defores-
tation assuming that the benefi ts of reduced
deforestation outweigh the opportunity costs
to society. These benefi ts include reduced for-
est fi re, air pollution, fl ooding, biodiversity
loss, soil erosion, and, perhaps, rainfall inhi-
bition ( 3, 13). They are diffi cult to quantify
and are largely untreated in most economic
models ( 4), even though they lower the net
costs of reducing deforestation.
Annual investments in community forest-
based economic activities, health, education,
and cultural preservation for the region’s indig-
enous and traditional forest peoples and small-
holder farmers would total $3.6 to $7.2 bil-
lion from 2010 to 2020 (see table, below and
SOM, § 5). The total opportunity cost poten-
tially incurred by landholders is estimated at
$14 billion (table S3 and fi g. S9), or $26 billion
if a minimum forest cover of 60% is imposed
for each Amazon state to avoid rainfall inhi-
bition ( 13) (SOM § 8). However, our estimate
includes only those private forests that would
qualify for compensation, which represent
only 10 to 15% of potential opportunity costs
(see table, below, and SOM, § 6).
Combining these costs with additional
investments in law enforcement and protected
area management gives a total budget of $7 to
$18 billion (see table, below, and SOM, § 9).
Already initiated by the Norway commitment,
this investment could reduce carbon emis-
sions from 2010 to 2020 by ~6 GtCO2e below
the historical baseline and by 12 GtCO2e
below projected emissions (see fi gure, page
1350) ( 14), culminating in annual emissions
reductions that are 2 to 5% of global emis-
sions rates in 2000–2006 (SOM, § 2). Under
a REDD system, as designed in the American
Clean Energy Security Act passed by the U.S.
House of Representatives, reductions under
Brazil’s deforestation target could generate
revenues valued from $37 billion to $111 bil-
lion between 2013 and 2020 ( 6) (SOM, § 10),
providing a margin for expanding the program
to end deforestation.
Ending deforestation in the Brazilian Ama-
zon in 2020 with less than 20% of the forest
cleared (table S4) would be an extraordinary
and extremely difficult achievement, per-
haps unique in the history of frontier expan-
sion. The likelihood of success, however, is
greatly enhanced by state-level programs that
link zoning and property registries with state-
wide deforestation reduction targets (SOM §
11). The Governors’ Climate and Forests Task
Force is working to connect these Amazon
state programs with international emissions
offset programs under development for Cali-
fornia and other U.S. states ( 15). State-level
programs must also eventually link up with
the federal “Amazon Fund,” where the Nor-
wegian commitment resides ( 1). Most tropi-
cal nations will require time to develop Bra-
zil’s institutional capacity, civil society orga-
nization, and legal framework ( 16). Ending
deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon and
reducing it elsewhere in the tropics is a cost-
effective approach to climate change mitiga-
tion with multiple benefi ts ( 13, 16).
References and Notes
1. J. Tollefson, Nature 460, 936 (2009).
2. D. C. Nepstad et al., Conserv. Biol. 20, 1595 (2006).
3. D. C. Nepstad et al., The Costs and Benefi ts of Reducing
Carbon Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Deg-
radation in the Brazilian Amazon (Woods Hole Research
Center, Falmouth, MA, 2007); http://whrc.org/policy/
BaliReports/index.htm.
4. G. E. Kindermann et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
105, 10302 (2008).
5. R. E. Gullison et al., Science 316, 985 (2007).
6. P. Piris-Cabezas, R. Lubowski, The Brazilian National Plan
on Climate Change: Potential Impacts in a U.S. Cap-and-
Trade System (Environmental Defense Fund, Washington,
DC, 2009); www.edf.org/documents/10563_Brazil-
ian_national_plan_on_climate_change.pdf.
7. R. A. Houghton, in Tropical Deforestation and Climate
Change, P. Moutinho, S. Schwartzman, Eds. [Amazon
Institute for Environmental Research (IPAM), Belém, Pará,
Brazil, 2005] pp. 13–21.
8. Government of Brazil, Presidential decree 6.263, 21
November 2007, National Climate Change Plan
(Government of Brazil, Brasília, 2008); www.mma.gov.br/
estruturas/smcq_climaticas/_arquivos/plano_nacional_
mudanca_clima.pdf.
9. B. S. Soares-Filho et al., Reducing Carbon Emissions from
Deforestation: The Role of ARPA’s Protected Areas in the
Brazilian Amazon (IPAM, Belém, Pará, Brazil, 2008).
10. D. Nepstad et al., Conserv. Biol. 20, 65 (2006).
11. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografi a e Estatística (IBGE),
Censo agropecuário de 2006; www.ibge.gov.br.
12. A. Lima, Zoneamento ecologico-economico: A luz dos dire-
itos socioambientais (Jurus Editora, Curitiba, Brazil, 2005).
13. C. M. Stickler et al., Glob. Change Biol. 15, 2803 (2009).
14. B. S. Soares-Filho et al., Nature 440, 520 (2006).
15. Governors’ Climate and Forests Task Force, www.
climatechange.ca.gov/forestry_task_force/index.html.
16. A. Angelsen et al., Reducing Emissions from Deforesta-
tion and Forest Degradation (REDD): An Options Assess-
ment Report (Meridian Institute, Washington, DC, 2009);
www.redd-oar.org/ (accessed 14 September 2009).
17. Supported by the National Science Foundation, the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(LBA-ECO), the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the
David and Lucille Packard Foundation, the Electric Power
Research Institute, Linden Conservation Trust, the Blue
Moon Foundation, and the Global Opportunities Fund,
government of the United Kingdom. K. Schwalbe assisted
with editing and graphics; P. Moreira, Foster Brown, and
three anonymous reviewers provided comments on an
earlier draft.
Region or state
Forest peoples‘
fund
(106 U.S. $)
Enforcement and
landholder compensation
(106 U.S. $)
Estimated costs of a program to end deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon
Protected area
management
(106 U.S. $)
Total cost
(106 U.S. $)
Brazilian Amazon
Acre
Amapá
Amazonas
Maranhão
Mato Grosso
Pará
Rondonia
^
Roraima
Tocantins
3,606
252
68
565
189
335
1,357
580
116
147
7,213
503
135
1,129
377
669
2,715
1,159
231
293
Low High Low High Low High Low High
1,459
106
13
229
13
693
280
94
27
4
6,502
147
12
116
248
4,135
639
1,127
19
60
1,456
54
56
546
10
80
488
79
90
51
4,368
163
168
1,639
31
240
1,464
238
271
154
6,521
412
136
1,340
212
1,107
2,125
752
233
202
18,082
813
315
2,884
656
5,044
4,818
2,524
522
507 Supporting Online Material
www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/325/5945/1350/DC1
10.1126/science.1182108
Ending deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon by 2020. These estimates for costs incurred from 2010 to
2020 assume that current budgetary outlays from the Brazilian government continue. (SOM § 9)
Published by AAAS
on December 3, 2009 www.sciencemag.orgDownloaded from
... However, after 2012, weakened enforcement led to a resurgence of deforestation, highlighting the importance of sustained commitment. Notably, during the period of reduced deforestation, agricultural output continued to rise, indicating that economic development was not hindered [18][19][20]. Approximately 50% of the intact forests in the Amazon Basin are situated in Indigenous territories, where deforestation rates are considerably lower [21]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) often originate from wildlife, with zoonotic transmissions, such as those causing pandemic influenza, Ebola, and COVID-19. Ecological disruptions, including deforestation and land-use changes, have heightened the risk of these diseases by increasing human contact with wildlife. Aim: The aim of this article is to examine emergency medical services (EMS), paramedics, and nursing preparedness and intervention strategies during infectious disease outbreaks. Methods: Methods include analyzing zoonotic spillover factors and reviewing prevention strategies under the One Health framework. Results: The findings reveal that efforts to prevent zoonotic spillover are minimal, with most attention focused on post-spillover measures like vaccine development and healthcare response. Results suggest that a comprehensive approach, including forest conservation, biosecurity in animal husbandry, and regulating wildlife markets, can reduce the risk of future outbreaks. Conclusion: It concludes that true prevention requires addressing the root causes of zoonotic transmission, enhancing community-driven initiatives, and improving biosecurity to mitigate spillover risk.
... Agroforestry systems (AFS) have been proposed to reduce the GHG emissions of agricultural practices (Campos & Nepstad 2006). Forest loss, partially for conversion to agriculture, in Brazilian Amazonia has generated at least 5% of global GHG emissions (Nepstad et al. 2009). Smallholdings (< 100 ha) in Brazilian Amazonia occupy ~ 38% of the total land area under cultivation (Brondizio et al. 2009) and are Abstract Slash-and-mulch agroforestry systems can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by mulching the vegetation instead of burning it. ...
Article
Full-text available
Slash-and-mulch agroforestry systems can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by mulching the vegetation instead of burning it. This mulch layer then contains greater stocks of organic material than after burning, making it a potential source of N2O and CH4 efflux during decomposition. We examined N2O and CH4 efflux from slash-and-mulch AFS using a two-way factorial design: with and without P + K fertilization, and with and without a nitrogen-fixing tree (Inga edulis). We hypothesized that inclusion of N-fixing trees would increase N2O efflux and that CH4 efflux would increase due to increased soil moisture with mulching. We measured trace gas fluxes prior to the end of Rotation 1, and after mulching to begin Rotation 2. N2O efflux increased with I. edulis during the year prior to, but not after, mulching. No differences by treatment were detected for CH4 efflux before or after mulching. Site conversion from secondary forest to Rotation 2 resulted in a 130% increase in N2O efflux and a 430% decrease in CH4 efflux. The CO2e increase of 2,400 kg ha⁻¹ was an order of magnitude less than estimated releases of trace gases from burning (38,400 kg ha⁻¹). For both N2O and CH4, land disturbance during mulching led to larger changes in trace gas fluxes than either P + K fertilization or inclusion of the N-fixer. The order-of-magnitude estimates of trace gas release as CO2e from mulching and the addition of N-fixers appears to be less than that from burning alone.
... The Amazon is compromised due to intense anthropogenic pressures, reaching a critical stage where the forest struggles to regenerate. There is an imminent risk of this vast forest reaching a point of no return and transforming into a savanna by the end of the century [58,59]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The Brazilian Legal Amazon, crucial for ecosystem services such as biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and climate regulation, has declined over time in its capacity to absorb carbon dioxide. In response, global policies are being developed to mitigate climate change, which has emerged as a central issue in the planetary health approach. The objective of this study was to investigate how elementary school students in a rural school in the Southern Amazonas state perceive climate change and understand its implications for the health of the planet. Understanding the phenomenon’s complexity, we conducted research with students from riverside communities in the Southern Amazon region. The data were analyzed using relative, absolute and percentage frequency tables, with a Fisher’s test applied at a 5% significance level. A significant finding was the predominant difficulty students had in accurately conceptualizing climate change, highlighting notable gaps in their understanding of these wide-ranging issues. In the context of the global climate crisis we are experiencing, the integration of concepts related to climate change in basic education becomes indispensable. This study emphasizes not only the existing knowledge gap but also the urgency of educational approaches that prepare children and young people for the challenges of mitigation, adaptation, and understanding the complexities of climate change and its planetary implications.
... as características da ocupação do espaço tendem a induzir os agricultores familiares à especialização, o que pode ser um fator de risco para a família. Aliado a esses pontos, acrescenta-se o estado frequente de degradação dos pastos, amplamente descritos e acompanhados na academia (FEARNSIDE, 2004;NEPSTAD et al., 2009;DIAS FILHO, 2011) e a questão da contradição no desenvolvimento da atividade em áreas camponesas devido ao valor simbólico que a pecuária carrega: símbolo do capital, da concentração fundiária, e dos conflitos no campo. É nessa amálgama de características que os autores se lançam na indagação: que caminhos são possíveis para uma reestruturação do agroecossistema dentro dos princípios da agroecologia? ...
... as características da ocupação do espaço tendem a induzir os agricultores familiares à especialização, o que pode ser um fator de risco para a família. Aliado a esses pontos, acrescenta-se o estado frequente de degradação dos pastos, amplamente descritos e acompanhados na academia (FEARNSIDE, 2004;NEPSTAD et al., 2009;DIAS FILHO, 2011) e a questão da contradição no desenvolvimento da atividade em áreas camponesas devido ao valor simbólico que a pecuária carrega: símbolo do capital, da concentração fundiária, e dos conflitos no campo. É nessa amálgama de características que os autores se lançam na indagação: que caminhos são possíveis para uma reestruturação do agroecossistema dentro dos princípios da agroecologia? ...
Article
Full-text available
Intact native forests under negligible large-scale human pressures (i.e. high-integrity forests) are critical for biodiversity conservation. However, high-integrity forests are declining worldwide due to deforestation and forest degradation. Recognizing the importance of high-integrity ecosystems (including forests), the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) has directly included the maintenance and restoration of ecosystem integrity, in addition to ecosystem extent, in its goals and targets. Yet, the headline indicators identified to help nations monitor forest ecosystems and their integrity can currently track changes only in (1) forest cover or extent, and (2) the risk of ecosystem collapse using the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems (RLE). These headline indicators are unlikely to facilitate the monitoring of forest integrity for two reasons. First, focusing on forest cover not only misses the impacts of anthropogenic degradation on forests but can also fail to detect the effect of positive management actions in enhancing forest integrity. Second, the risk of ecosystem collapse as measured by the ordinal RLE index (from Least Concern to Critically Endangered) makes it unlikely that changes to the continuum of forest integrity over space and time would be reported by nations. Importantly, forest ecosystems in many biodiverse African and Asian nations remain unassessed with the RLE. As such, many nations will likely resort to monitoring forest cover alone and therefore inadequately report progress against forest integrity goals and targets. We concur that monitoring changes in forest cover and the risk of ecosystem collapse are indeed vital aspects of conservation monitoring. Yet, they are insufficient for the specific purpose of tracking progress against crucial ecosystem integrity components of the GBF’s goals. We discuss the pitfalls of merely monitoring forest cover, a likely outcome with the current headline indicators. Augmenting forest cover monitoring with indicators that capture change in absolute area along the continuum of forest integrity would help monitor progress toward achieving area-based targets related to both integrity and extent of global forests.
Preprint
Full-text available
Brazil emerged as an agricultural powerhouse in the last four decades, producing 33% of the world’s soybeans and 14% of its beef. Historically, much of that growth has come at the expense of its native ecosystems. A growing body of work suggests this paradigm is outdated and brings negative social and environmental outcomes. Here, we provide an integrated analysis of an alternate pathway to solve this puzzle based on a scenario of land-use allocation governance. We compare it with a business-as-usual scenario through the lens of cost, revenues, and impact. The path forward is based on four fronts that can reduce deforestation while increasing production and social well-being. First, allocate undesignated public forests as protected areas and improve the management of new and existing ones. This first strategy would generate a positive return, and foster recognition of human rights, cultural preservation, and improved livelihoods. Second, prevent legal deforestation on private lands and promote compliance with Brazil's Native Vegetation Protection Law (Brasil, 2012) through restoration, also generating positive returns and directing the region towards a zero-deforestation future. Third, promote sustainable intensification of medium and large farms. It would allow Brazil to achieve its agricultural production targets while freeing land up for soy expansion and restoration. Fourth, improve technical assistance and increase market access and income of smallholders while reducing deforestation pressure on family farms. Implementing these fronts requires a coordinated effort between public and private institutions. Still, it would reestablish Brazil`s global leadership in managing natural resources and mitigating climate change.
Article
This study assessed the structural changes in fungal and bacterial communities in soils under integrated crop- livestock systems, comparing six rainfed plots with four center-pivot irrigated quadrants and a neighbor native forest. All plots were managed under crop rotations with palisade grass (Urochloa brizantha), upland rice, soybean, maize, and maize + pasture intercropping. Soil samples collected in 2015 and 2016 were analyzed by Terminal Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism. Canonical analyses of principal coordinates using Bray- Curtis dissimilarity indices showed that the microbial communities were differently influenced by the land use (rainfed, irrigated, or forest) and the crop. The results with the AluI endonuclease in 2015 showed that the fungal community structure shifted according to the treatments (cropped plants) and soil moisture. In 2016, there were overlapping fungal communities in rainfed and irrigated plots with less evident responses to the cultivated crop. There was a clear separation between bacterial communities in rainfed and irrigated areas in both years, but no clear distinction was found between crops within a management system. There was a higher overlap of important (0.4 > mean relative abundance) fungal T-RFs in rainfed and irrigated plots samples for two enzymes. In contrast, there was a higher overlap of bacterial T-RFs between irrigated areas and forest. The results suggest that crop-livestock integrated management increased soil fungal diversity compared to the native vegetation, while this shift in diversity was not clear for bacteria. The diversity increase and the fungal com- munity's response to crop rotations may be linked to reports of soil suppressiveness to soil-borne fungal pathogens.
Article
A Reserva Extrativista Chico Mendes, localizada na região sul do Acre próximo à fronteira com o Peru e a Bolívia, se tornou precursora na conciliação da biodiversidade e o seu uso sustentável pela população que abriga nesta região, porém a sua conservação tem sido ameaçada constantemente pelo aumento do desmatamento e incêndios na floresta, substituindo-as por pastagem para a criação de gado. A metodologia desta pesquisa abordamos o tema “conservação da vegetação na reserva extrativista Chico Mendes” que foi estruturada em etapas principais. Na primeira etapa, foi realizada uma revisão bibliográfica extensa para entender a história e o contexto da criação da Reserva Extrativista Chico Mendes, as espécies vegetais presentes e quaisquer dados ou estudos anteriores relacionados à conservação da vegetação na área. O objetivo deste artigo visa analisar por meio de estudos anteriores sobre o tema e utilizando uma abordagem multitemporal, com o auxílio das ferramentas Mapbiomas e Qgis, o estado de conservação da vegetação na Resex, que abrange uma área de aproximadamente 970 mil hectares, mostrando as mudanças ocorridas desde a sua criação até os dias atuais. O estudo constatar que a Reserva Extrativista Chico Mendes, embora seja uma área de proteção ambiental, vem sofrendo com diversos problemas relacionados à conservação de sua vegetação. A análise dos dados coletados evidenciou uma redução significativa na cobertura vegetal ao longo dos anos, devido principalmente à ação humana, como desmatamento para fins agrícolas e pecuária. Também podemos observar a importância da vegetação para a manutenção do equilíbrio ecológico e como o uso das geotecnologias pode auxiliar na proteção e monitoramento das reservas extrativistas.
Chapter
Natural climate changes have been responsible for new rearrangements of global biodiversity over geological time. The Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC), over the last 100 years, has as its main cause the human contribution to the increase in greenhouse gas emissions. The ACC has sharply challenged the adaptive capacity of species. In the Amazon Forest, due to the peculiarity of the hot and humid climate, many species present high climatic vulnerability, mainly due to their narrow climatic niches. Amazonian mammals are one of the groups that have shown great changes in their distributions in the face of ACC. Due to the critical ecological roles of mammals in tropical forests, drastic reductions in their populations could have serious consequences for Amazonian ecosystems. In this chapter, we describe anthropogenic climate change and its impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity in general, emphasizing the Amazon mammals. We detail how land-use changes in the Amazon have contributed to climate change and how climate change has affected the Amazon. To assess the impact of ACC on mammals, we analyzed 43 studies carried out on the subject in the last 15 years. The effects of ACC, together with the effects of deforestation, mainly affect the ability to access new areas with favorable climatic conditions and the dispersal capacity of mammal species in the Amazon Region.
Article
Full-text available
Emissions of carbon from tropical deforestation and degradation currently account for 12-15% of total anthropogenic carbon emissions each year, and Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD; including REDD+) is poised to be the primary international mechanism with the potential to reduce these emissions. This article provides a brief summary of the scientific research that led to REDD, and that continues to help refine and resolve issues of effectiveness, efficiency and equitability for a REDD mechanism. However, REDD deals only with tropical forests and there are other regions, ecosystems and processes that govern the sources and sinks of carbon in terrestrial ecosystems. Ongoing research will reveal which of these other flows of carbon are most important, and which of them might present further opportunities to reduce emissions (or enhance sinks) through environmental policy mechanisms, as well as how they might do this.
Article
Full-text available
The United Nations climate treaty may soon include a mechanism for compensating tropical nations that succeed in reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, source of nearly one fifth of global carbon emissions. We review the potential for this mechanism [reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD)] to provoke ecological damages and promote ecological cobenefits. Nations could potentially participate in REDD by slowing clear-cutting of mature tropical forest, slowing or decreasing the impact of selective logging, promoting forest regeneration and restoration, and expanding tree plantations. REDD could also foster efforts to reduce the incidence of forest fire. Potential ecological costs include the accelerated loss (through displaced agricultural expansion) of low-biomass, high-conservation-value ecosystems, and substitution of low-biomass vegetation by monoculture tree plantations. These costs could be avoided through measures that protect low-biomass native ecosystems. Substantial ecological cobenefits should be conferred under most circumstances, and include the maintenance or restoration of (1) watershed functions, (2) local and regional climate regimes, (3) soils and biogeochemical processes, (4) water quality and aquatic habitat, and (5) terrestrial habitat. Some tools already being developed to monitor, report and verify (MRV) carbon emissions performance can also be used to measure other elements of ecosystem function, making development of MRV systems for ecological cobenefits a concrete possibility. Analysis of possible REDD program interventions in a large-scale Amazon landscape indicates that even modest flows of forest carbon funding can provide substantial cobenefits for aquatic ecosystems, but that the functional integrity of the landscape's myriad small watersheds would be best protected under a more even spatial distribution of forests. Because of its focus on an ecosystem service with global benefits, REDD could access a large pool of global stakeholders willing to pay to maintain carbon in forests, thereby providing a potential cascade of ecosystem services to local stakeholders who would otherwise be unable to afford them.
Article
Full-text available
Tropical deforestation is estimated to cause about one-quarter of anthropogenic carbon emissions, loss of biodiversity, and other environmental services. United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change talks are now considering mechanisms for avoiding deforestation (AD), but the economic potential of AD has yet to be addressed. We use three economic models of global land use and management to analyze the potential contribution of AD activities to reduced greenhouse gas emissions. AD activities are found to be a competitive, low-cost abatement option. A program providing a 10% reduction in deforestation from 2005 to 2030 could provide 0.3–0.6 Gt (1 Gt = 1 × 10⁵ g) CO2·yr⁻¹ in emission reductions and would require $0.4 billion to $1.7 billion·yr⁻¹ for 30 years. A 50% reduction in deforestation from 2005 to 2030 could provide 1.5–2.7 Gt CO2·yr⁻¹ in emission reductions and would require $17.2 billion to $28.0 billion·yr⁻¹. Finally, some caveats to the analysis that could increase costs of AD programs are described. • carbon sequestration • climate change • reducing emissions from deforestation and ecosystem degradation (REDD) • marginal cost • tropical forest
Article
Full-text available
Expansion of the cattle and soy industries in the Amazon basin has increased deforestation rates and will soon push all-weather highways into the region's core. In the face of this growing pressure, a comprehensive conservation strategy for the Amazon basin should protect its watersheds, the full range of species and ecosystem diversity, and the stability of regional climates. Here we report that protected areas in the Amazon basin--the central feature of prevailing conservation approaches--are an important but insufficient component of this strategy, based on policy-sensitive simulations of future deforestation. By 2050, current trends in agricultural expansion will eliminate a total of 40% of Amazon forests, including at least two-thirds of the forest cover of six major watersheds and 12 ecoregions, releasing 32 +/- 8 Pg of carbon to the atmosphere. One-quarter of the 382 mammalian species examined will lose more than 40% of the forest within their Amazon ranges. Although an expanded and enforced network of protected areas could avoid as much as one-third of this projected forest loss, conservation on private lands is also essential. Expanding market pressures for sound land management and prevention of forest clearing on lands unsuitable for agriculture are critical ingredients of a strategy for comprehensive conservation.
Article
Full-text available
Conservation scientists generally agree that many types of protected areas will be needed to protect tropical forests. But little is known of the comparative performance of inhabited and uninhabited reserves in slowing the most extreme form of forest disturbance: conversion to agriculture. We used satellite-based maps of land cover and fire occurrence in the Brazilian Amazon to compare the performance of large (> 10,000 ha) uninhabited (parks) and inhabited (indigenous lands, extractive reserves, and national forests) reserves. Reserves significantly reduced both deforestation and fire. Deforestation was 1.7 (extractive reserves) to 20 (parks) times higher along the outside versus the inside of the reserve perimeters and fire occurrence was 4 (indigenous lands) to 9 (national forests) times higher. No strong difference in the inhibition of deforestation (p = 0. 11) or fire (p = 0.34) was found between parks and indigenous lands. However, uninhabited reserves tended to be located away from areas of high deforestation and burning rates. In contrast, indigenous lands were often created in response to frontier expansion, and many prevented deforestation completely despite high rates of deforestation along their boundaries. The inhibitory effect of indigenous lands on deforestation was strong after centuries of contact with the national society and was not correlated with indigenous population density. Indigenous lands occupy one-fifth of the Brazilian Amazon-five times the area under protection in parks--and are currently the most important barrier to Amazon deforestation. As the protected-area network expands from 36% to 41% of the Brazilian Amazon over the coming years, the greatest challenge will be successful reserve implementation in high-risk areas of frontier expansion as indigenous lands are strengthened. This success will depend on a broad base of political support.
Article
Divulgação dos SUMÁRIOS das obras recentemente incorporadas ao acervo da Biblioteca Ministro Oscar Saraiva do STJ. Em respeito à lei de Direitos Autorais, não disponibilizamos a obra na íntegra. Localização: 34:504(81) L732z Código de barras: STJ0003339 Analisa a fonte originária dos poderes normativos do zoneamento ecológico-econômico e sua correlação com a implementação de políticas públicas, planejamento e as normas de controle de ocupação do território e de uso dos recursos naturais. Propõe uma reflexão teórica sobre o tema, instrumento da política nacional de meio ambiente e de gestão territorial.
Article
In Brazil, details are emerging for plans to stop deforestation. Can it serve as a model for other nations?
Article
Amazon beef and soybean industries, the primary drivers of Amazon deforestation, are increasingly responsive to economic signals emanating from around the world, such as those associated with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, "mad cow disease") outbreaks and China's economic growth. The expanding role of these economic "teleconnections" (coupled phenomena that take place in distant places on the planet) led to a 3-year period (2002-2004) of historically high deforestation rates. But it also increases the potential for large-scale conservation in the region as markets and finance institutions demand better environmental and social performance of beef and soy producers. Cattle ranchers and soy farmers who have generally opposed ambitious government regulations that require forest reserves on private property are realizing that good land stewardship-including compliance with legislation-may increase their access to expanding domestic and international markets and to credit and lower the risk of "losing" their land to agrarian reform. The realization of this potential depends on the successful negotiation of social and environmental performance criteria and an associated system of certification that are acceptable to both the industries and civil society. The foot-and-mouth eradication system, in which geographic zones win permission to export beef, may provide an important model for the design of a low-cost, peer-enforced, socioenvironmental certification system that becomes the mechanism by which beef and soy industries gain access to markets outside the Amazon.