Deforestation in Amazonia

1 Introduction=20
2 History=20
3 Current = rates and=20 causes=20
4 Future=20 paths=20
5 Impacts=20
6 Alternatives=20
7 Further=20 Reading

Lead Author: Philip M.=20 Fearnside (other=20 articles)

Article Topics: Forestry and Land-use=20 and land-cover change

This article has been reviewed=20 and approved by the following Topic Editor: Mryka = Hall-Beyer=20 (other = articles)

Last Updated: March 29,=20 2007

Introduction

=20

Transamazon = Highway. (Source:=20 Philip M. Fearnside)

Tropical forests in Amazonia are being cleared rapidly, representing = an=20 important contribution to la= nd-use=20 and land-cover change. While some processes are common to forests = throughout=20 the world, others are not. Amazonian clearing is dominated by large = cattle=20 ranchers, with an increasing role being played by soybeans. Small = farmers and=20 estate crops such as oil palm have less relative importance here than = elsewhere.=20 Deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia has a significant contribution from=20 =E2=80=9Culterior=E2=80=9D motives such as land speculation, money = laundering and tax evasion.=20 Infrastructure projects, especially highway construction and = improvement,=20 represent key governmental decisions unleashing chains of activity that = escape=20 from government control. Deforestation sacrifices environmental services = such as=20 maintenance of biodiversity, = water=20 cycling and carbon = stocks.=20 The substantial impact of this deforestation on loss of environmental = services=20 has so far not entered into decision-making on infrastructure projects, = making=20 strengthening of the environmental assessment and licensing system a = high=20 priority for containing future loss of forest.

History

=20

Names of Amazonian states. = (Source: Philip=20 M. Fearnside)

Deforestation has been a feature of Amazonian landscape since long = before the=20 arrival of Europeans in the 1500s. Indeed, no forest in the region can = be=20 considered =E2=80=9Cvirgin=E2=80=9D in the sense of being unaffected by = past human activities.=20 Prior to decimation of their populations by disease and violence from = the=20 Europeans, indigenous peoples maintained extensive areas of agriculture = and they=20 enriched the surrounding forest with useful species such as Brazil=20 nuts. These human influences would be merged with forest regrowth = during the=20 lapse of three centuries before non-tribal populations reached levels = sufficient=20 to begin exerting significant pressure on the forest. Contrary to the = claims of=20 some, this history of past human disturbance in no way diminishes the = rationale=20 for conserving Amazonian forests today. Likewise, the exuberant forests = that now=20 stand on formerly cleared areas do not justify the myth of a future=20 recovery-that forests being cleared today may one day regrow to their = former=20 stature. In practice, secondary forests are recleared for cattle pasture = or=20 other uses long before they regain the biomass and diversity of = =E2=80=9Cprimary=E2=80=9D=20 forests.

=20

Ecoregions in Amazonia. = (Source: Philip M.=20 Fearnside)

In Brazil, deforestation over the course of several centuries = destroyed the=20 Atlantic= =20 forest of the south-central part of the country (note: the names of = Brazil=E2=80=99s=20 regions treat Rio de Janeiro as the =E2=80=9Ccenter=E2=80=9D of the = country). The pace of=20 clearing was especially dramatic in the case of state of Paran=C3=A1, = where the=20 forest was almost completely cleared in less than 30 years in the middle = of the=20 20th century. At the beginning of this period prominent citizens = frequently made=20 statements to the effect that Paran=C3=A1=E2=80=99s forests were so vast = that human efforts=20 would =E2=80=9Cnever=E2=80=9D put more than a dent in them. The = similarity of these statements=20 to those sometimes made today with reference to the Amazon forest is = evident, as=20 is the irony of their baselessness.

Deforestation in Amazonia has proceeded with a succession of = different forces=20 in different periods. The Amazon rubber boom lasted from the invention = of the=20 pneumatic tire in the 1880s to the beginning of commercial rubber = production=20 from plantations in Southeast Asia in 1914. During this period = =E2=80=9Cagricultural=20 colonies=E2=80=9D such as those in the 35,000-square-kilometer = (km²) Zona=20 Bragantina near Bel=C3=A9m, in the state of Par=C3=A1, supplied the = rapidly growing urban=20 centers, and, to a certain extent, the population engaged full-time in=20 exploitation of the natural rubber trees in the Amazonian interior. Much = of the=20 agricultural land was abandoned to secondary forest when the rubber boom = collapsed. More recent clearing surges occurred with the opening of the=20 Bel=C3=A9m-Bras=C3=ADlia Highway in the late 1950s, and especially the = Transamazon Highway=20 in 1970 (the event often taken as the beginning of the = =E2=80=9Cmodern=E2=80=9D period of=20 Amazonian clearing). The Transamazon Highway was settled by small = farmers, many=20 of whom were brought from other parts of Brazil by the federal = government and=20 settled in official colonization projects. This much-publicized = initiative was=20 soon overshadowed in terms of its impact on deforestation by the large = cattle=20 ranchers who received generous tax incentives and subsidized=20 financing from the government though the Superintendency for the = Development of=20 Amazonia (SUDAM). Large and medium-sized ranchers continue to account = for the=20 bulk of clearing in Brazilian Amazonia. The relative role of small = versus large=20 actors is an important difference between different locations in = Brazilian=20 Amazonia, between different historical periods, and between Brazil and = other=20 countries.

Current rates and causes

Arc of = Deforestation in the=20 region of Terra do Meio. (Source: Philip M. Fearnside)

Global generalizations about the role of =E2=80=9Cpoverty=E2=80=9D in = tropical deforestation=20 generally do not apply to Brazil, where most clearing is done by the = rich.=20 Cattle ranching is the use put to the great majority of land cleared, = either=20 immediately upon clearing in the case of large ranchers, or after a = harvest or=20 two of an annual crop in the case of small farmers. Although the = government=20 incentives programs of the 1970s and 1980s have been either discontinued = or have=20 diminished in importance, government infrastructure investment and = agricultural=20 credit continue to encourage clearing. Logging has a key role in serving = as a=20 source of funds for landholders to pay for deforestation. Logging also = provides=20 initial access roads, which can then be used and improved by those who = later=20 deforest the areas. Unlike the clear cutting that is done for timber = harvesting=20 in temperate and boreal forests, logging in Amazonia is always selective = because=20 only a few species have commercial value. The disturbed forest that = remains=20 after logging is much more susceptible to fire than are unlogged = forests.

Deforestation in Amazonia is often not =E2=80=9Crational=E2=80=9D = from the normal financial=20 perspective of paying an attractive return on money invested, at least = when only=20 legal money flows are considered. In practice, deforesters make their = decisions=20 based on the combined total of all benefit streams, including those that = may be=20 undeclared and/or illegal. Investment in Amazonian land can serve as a = means of=20 laundering money from illegal sources such as drug trafficking, = corruption, sale=20 of stolen goods and income from legitimate activities that is undeclared = to tax=20 authorities. For money from these sources the sale of any beef or other = products=20 produced in the Amazonian landholdings represents legal income, whereas = the=20 investment needed to produce it is highly variable and easily = underdeclared to=20 tax authorities.

=20

Burning and = deforestation of the=20 Amazon forest to make grazing lands. Source: (NASA=20 LBA-ECO Project)

=E2=80=9CUlterior=E2=80=9D motives for clearing also include = potential returns from land=20 speculation. The value = of land in=20 Amazonia has generally climbed upward and invariably shoots to much = higher=20 levels where a road is built or improved. Buying land or claims to land = at low=20 prices and reselling it later at much higher prices can give greater = returns to=20 a landholder than do the ranching and agriculture that are undertaken = during his=20 tenure. Clearing a portion of the land is the only practical way to = maintain=20 claim to the area and avoid it being invaded by landless peasants, taken = over by=20 another large operator, or confiscated by the government for agrarian = reform.=20 Prior to the 1994 =E2=80=9CPlano Real=E2=80=9D economic reform, = Brazil=E2=80=99s rate of inflation was=20 much higher than it is today and land speculation represented a more = powerful=20 force, as was shown by the drop by over 50% in the deforestation rate in = 1996=20 and 1997 in parallel with falling land values resulting from the removal = of=20 inflation as a driving force. Today, although there is no longer a need = to=20 invest funds in real estate as an escape from inflation, profits can = still be=20 made by individual landholders when infrastructure projects lead to = increasing=20 land values.

A state of lawlessness prevails in substantial areas in Amazonia, = leading to=20 distinctive =E2=80=9Cleaps=E2=80=9D in the deforestation frontier. Most = notorious is the =E2=80=9CTerra=20 do Meio=E2=80=9D, or =E2=80=9CMiddle Lands=E2=80=9D to the west of the = Xingu River encompassing the=20 Iriri River basin. This area, the size of Switzerland, has effectively = been=20 outside of the control of the Brazilian government and is the realm of = drug=20 traffickers, illegal loggers and grileiros, or large land thieves who=20 appropriate land through fraudulent (and sometimes violent) means. = Declaration=20 of a series of reserves in the area in 2005, following the assassination = of=20 Sister Dorothy Stang, is a hopeful sign that the lawless condition is = subject to=20 change. The activities of grileiros continue in other locations, most = recently=20 increasing in the southern part of the state of Amazonas.

A new and increasing force driving deforestation is export = commodities such=20 as soybeans and beef. Soybeans have taken over much of the cerrado = (central=20 Brazilian savanna) and are advancing in some rainforest areas such as = Santar=C3=A9m,=20 Par=C3=A1. Soybeans have a large indirect force on deforestation by = providing=20 economic justification for highway construction projects that spur = forest loss=20 through cattle ranching, logging and land speculation. Beef export<= /A> has=20 traditionally not been a force behind deforestation in Brazil (in sharp = contrast=20 to the =E2=80=9Chamburger connection=E2=80=9D of Central America) = because the presence of=20 foot-and-mouth disease made major markets in Europe, = Japan and=20 North America unwilling to import beef in frozen form. Since 1996 states = in=20 Brazil have successively been certified as free of foot-and-mouth = disease,=20 starting in the extreme south of the country and now including three of = the nine=20 Amazonian states. The impact of beef export on deforestation already = affects all=20 of Amazonia, even though most of the area is still uncertified and = cannot export=20 beef directly. Instead, beef produced outside of Amazonia, for example = in the=20 state of S=C3=A3o Paulo, can be exported while the people in S=C3=A3o = Paulo eat beef=20 raised in Par=C3=A1.

Over 80% of both the cumulative clearing and the current clearing = activity is=20 concentrated in the =E2=80=9Carc of deforestation,=E2=80=9D which is a = band along the eastern=20 and southern edges of the forest. Deforestation advances from this band = towards=20 the center of the region. However, in addition to the expansion from = existing=20 clearings in the arc of deforestation, smaller clearings that appear far = from=20 the existing frontier have an importance that is much greater than their = small=20 area would suggest. These new clearings can serve as the seeds for much = greater=20 clearing activity in the future in the remaining blocks of undisturbed = forest.=20 Decisions on building highways that open these areas to migration and to = investment are critical in speeding the deforestation process.

Future paths

=20

Intact Amazon = forest near=20 Manaus. (Source: Philip M. Fearnside)

The future path of deforestation depends on human decisions. It is = not=20 foreordained that the Amazon forest will be destroyed, although this is=20 obviously the endpoint if present trends continue unchanged. Various = modeling=20 efforts have projected clearing patterns in Amazonia and agree that vast = areas=20 would be cleared if trends continue and planned infrastruture projects = are=20 built. Attempts to model what might happen under hypothetical = =E2=80=9Cgovernance=E2=80=9D=20 scenarios are less convincing, since they rely on simple assumptions of=20 restraint and obedience to environmental regulations that are at = variance with=20 observed behavior to date. Nevertheless, the potential to change = deforestation=20 behavior is real, both through creation of protected areas and through = co= mmand and=20 control measures to repress illegal clearing. An important = historical=20 example is the deforestation licensing and control program that was = carried out=20 by the state government in Mato Grosso over the 1999-2001 period, where = clearing=20 patterns indicated that the program had a real effect on deforestation = rates.=20 This is important as a demonstration that deforestation can be = controlled if=20 government authorities are serious about doing so. The example is = historical, as=20 the election of Brazil=E2=80=99s largest soybean entrepreneur as state = governor in 2002=20 put an end to the program in practice.

So far the principal measures that have been used to limit = deforestation are=20 creation of reserves and repression by fining those who clear without = required=20 authorizations. These are the measures that agencies such as the = Brazilian=20 Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) = are=20 empowered to implement. However, the better-funded government agencies = such as=20 the Ministry of Transportation continue to plan and build roads and = other=20 infrastructure projects without regard for impact on deforestation. = While the=20 environmental licensing process for infrastructure projects may lead to=20 compensatory actions, such as creation of reserves and funding of = programs for=20 monitoring and = enforcement of regulations, the licensing has on many occasions shown = itself to=20 be incapable of stopping damaging projects and either diverting = development=20 efforts to less-damaging alternatives to achieve the same objectives or = forcing=20 a rethinking of the wisdom of the objectives themselves. Environmental = impact=20 studies (EIS) have only been required in Brazil since 1986 and the = system is=20 still subject to continual challenges and (often successful) attempts to = build=20 infrastructure with either no EIS (e.g., the proposed BR-319 Highway) or = with an=20 inadequate EIS that is effectively replaced with a package of parallel=20 activities that escape from the legal requirement of serving as = prerequisites=20 for the infrastructure (e.g., the proposed BR-163 Highway). Building and = improving highways is one of the principal ways that government = decisions affect=20 the deforestation process; the consequences of these decisions are much = more far=20 reaching than are the effects of any compensatory programs such as = environmental=20 education, promotion of agroforestry = and the=20 like. One of the most basic measures needed is strengthening the e= nvironmental=20 impact assessment and licensing system such that it serves its = intended role=20 of informing major decisions before they are made, rather than as a = formality to=20 legalize decisions that have already been made.

Indigenous lands and various categories of parks and reserves = represent a=20 primary defense against deforestation. Indigenous peoples, whose = officially=20 recognized lands represent approximately 20% of Brazilian Amazonia, = actively=20 defend their territories against invasion. An essential complement to = this is=20 the general understanding that invasion of indigenous land will not be = rewarded=20 by a land title or by any sort of compensation. In many places in the = arc of=20 deforestation the only forest that remains standing is what is in = indigenous=20 areas.

Since the mid 1990s tremendous progress has been made in = =E2=80=9Cdemarcating=E2=80=9D=20 indigenous areas, that is, marking the limits of these areas on the = ground (as=20 opposed to merely drawing them on a map). At the same time, = large=20 areas have been protected in newly created conservation units, both by = federal=20 and state governments. These include an increasing number of = =E2=80=9Csustainable use=E2=80=9D=20 reserves, although a number of new reserves have also been created in = the=20 =E2=80=9Cintegral protection=E2=80=9D category. Conservation units now = total roughly 10% of=20 Brazilian Amazonia. Decreeing a reserve, even if only on paper, can have = a=20 significant effect in discouraging both small squatters and large = grileiros from=20 clearing forest with the expectation of eventually receiving legal title = to=20 their claims. In the longer term =E2=80=9Cpaper parks=E2=80=9D are not = enough=E2=80=94the reserves must=20 be adequately guarded. Expansion of the reserve network must be done = quickly=20 because the opportunity to create reserves is often lost once = deforestation=20 advances into an area. Reserve creation is a critical step in guiding = the=20 development of Amazonia towards a future that maintains substantial = areas of=20 tropical forest.

Impacts

=20

Roads throughout Amazonia. = (Source: Philip=20 M. Fearnside)

Amazonian deforestation causes serious impacts that, if counted in = decision=20 making, would often be seen to outweigh the benefits derived from = clearing. Loss=20 of biodiversity is one such impact, which implies both loss of the value = of the direct=20 uses to which the species lost might be put by humans and the loss = of existence=20 values that are independent of such direct uses. Deforestation = impacts are=20 magnified by the pattern of clearing that leaves the remaining forest = divided=20 into fragments, which then degrade both biodiversity = and carbon stocks.

=20

BR-319 Highway. (Source: = Philip M.=20 Fearnside)

Deforestation also affects water cycling, because conversion of = forest to=20 cattle pasture results in the water running off into the rivers and = flowing=20 directly to the ocean without=20 being recycled through the trees. A significant part of the rainfall in=20 Amazonia, especially in the dry season, depends on water that has been = recycled=20 through the trees of the forest. This water is critical to preventing = droughts=20 from exceeding the forest=E2=80=99s tolerance for water stress, leading = to death of=20 trees and degradation of the forest through fire and further drought. = Water from=20 Amazonia is also critical to maintaining rainfall in the heavily = populated=20 regions in south-central Brazil, such as S=C3=A3o Paulo, and in = neighboring countries=20 such as Argentina.

Global = warming=20 receives a substantial input of greenhouse = gases from=20 Amazonian deforestation, although the majority of the gases released by = humanity=20 as a whole come from burning fossil = fuels such=20 as petroleum and coal rather=20 than from deforestation. However, over three-fourths of Brazil=E2=80=99s = contribution to=20 this global problem is the result of Amazonian deforestation. Half of = the dry=20 weight of the trees is carbon, and when = forest is cut=20 this carbon is released to the atmosphere either as carbon = dioxide or as methane, both from = burning and=20 from decomposition of wood that fails to burn. The fact that most = deforestation=20 is for cattle pastures that do little either for the national economy or = for=20 providing employment to the population offers an opportunity to slow=20 deforestation as part of a program for mitigating global warming. The = value of=20 the damage done by greenhouse-gas emissions= from=20 deforestation far exceeds the value = of the=20 timber, beef and other products that are sold as a result of the = clearing.=20

Alternatives

Discussion of =E2=80=9Calternatives to deforestation=E2=80=9D often = focuses on the extraction=20 of non-timber forest products such as rubber and Brazil=20 nuts, sustainable forest=20 management for timber, and increasing the production and = sustainability of=20 land uses in already deforested areas, for example by encouraging agroforestry. = These=20 =E2=80=9Calternatives=E2=80=9D all have their places, but they also have = limitations and are=20 often misrepresented with respect to their role in slowing = deforestation. The=20 economic logic that activities expand when they prove to be profitable = applies=20 to those undertaken in deforested areas, and what may be intended as an=20 =E2=80=9Calternative=E2=80=9D can, if it proves highly successful, = advance into the forest and=20 have the opposite effect on deforestation. Proposals for intensified = pasture=20 production and for extensive production of biofuels are subject to these = reservations. The same applies to annual crops: the notion that farmers = and=20 ranchers who reap greater per-hectare yields will be satisfied with = their=20 harvests and refrain from further deforestation is unrealistic as a = basis for=20 programs aimed at reducing deforestation. Unfortunately, people do not = stop=20 clearing when their stomachs are full, but instead use their increased = wealth to=20 expand their clearings.

Uses of standing forest such as sustainable (i.e., low intensity) = harvesting=20 of both non-timber and timber products often produce low financial = returns. This=20 is to be expected, but the rationale for promoting and subsidizing=20 these uses lies in their role in maintaining environmental services, not = in=20 their efficiency as commodity sources. These activities are valuable as=20 transitional mechanisms for maintaining traditional populations who can = serve as=20 forest guardians. The same activities can also serve as parts of future=20 mechanisms whereby environmental services of standing forest become the = primary=20 means of generating income to support the rural population, and the = basis of the=20 economy is shifted from its present reliance on forest destruction. = Among the=20 environmental services of the forest, carbon= =20 storage is the closest to becoming the basis of substantial = financial flows=20 through international negotiations, but the equally valuable services of = maintaining biodiversity = and water=20 cycling can eventually be expected to gain similar status.