InfoTrac Web: Expanded Academic ASAP.

 

                                                                             

   Source:  The Economist (US), May 12, 2001 p1.

                                                                             

    Title:  Managing the rainforests; Conservation in Brazil; Saving the

            rainforest.(Science and Technology)(efforts to save the rapidly

            diminishing rainforest)

                                                                             

 Subjects:  Amazon River Region - Environmental aspects

            Brazil - Environmental policy

            Rain forest ecology - Brazil

Locations:  Brazil

                                                                              

Electronic Collection:  A74450347

                   RN:  A74450347

                                                                             

 

Full Text COPYRIGHT 2001 Economist Newspaper Ltd.

 

EMPTY fields, as far as the eye can see, line the highway for most of the

300km (186 miles) from Belem, eastern Amazonia's main city, to the

timber-cutting town of Paragominas. Once it was all forest, but since the

1970s most of the trees in a broad strip beside the road have been cut-not

just to extract timber, but to clear pasture for cattle-raising, encouraged by

subsidies and tax incentives. Now, though, most of the fields lie empty and

are becoming overgrown with scrub. Cows are seen so infrequently that they

might be imagined to be an endangered species.

 

The deforestation, mostly in the past 30 years, of 14% of the Brazilian part

of Amazonia (about a third of the Amazon rainforest, the world's biggest, is

over the border in other countries) has been as much an economic as an

environmental disaster. The usable timber would be ripped out of a stretch of

forest and the rest would then be burned, because the land would often be

worth more when cleared than it had been as untouched forest. This value,

however, was due partly to excessive optimism over the region's agricultural

potential, and partly to a set of economically perverse incentives provided by

the government. When farming was actually tried, it was frequently found to be

unprofitable. And many did not even bother to try. Some chopped down the

trees, grabbed the grants and then abandoned the land. Others used the "farms"

they carved out of the jungle to disguise (highly taxed) profits on other

businesses as farming profits (which used to be tax-free). As a result, there

are now about 165,000kmA[superscript two] of abandoned land in Brazilian

Amazonia.

 

In recent years, the handouts and tax breaks that promoted deforestation have

been reduced. As a result, good-quality forested land can be worth as much as

40% more than cleared land. A law passed in 1998 introduced stiff penalties

for cutting trees without permission from Ibama, Brazil's

environmental-protection agency. Though deforestation seems to have slowed

since the mid-1990s (see chart), new figures due shortly will show that last

year's deforestation was little different from that in 1998 and 1999, and

about % of the forest was chopped.

 

Besides the cleared forest that shows up on the satellite pictures, each year

a further, unmeasured amount (at least 10,000kmA[superscript two], according

to a study carried out in 1999) has its most valuable trees ripped out and is

then abandoned. The big holes in forest cover caused by this reckless

extraction make the area drier and thus vulnerable to fires. And if the forest

does grow back, it grows differently, with fewer species, and choked by thick

creepers that Amazonians call cipo. Though most of the rainforest remains

intact-in contrast to the gloomiest predictions of the 1980s, which predicted

it would be almost gone by now-it continues to be hacked away at a rate that

will see it wiped out within the next 200 years.

 

Fortunately, there are stronger grounds than ever for hoping that this will

not happen. Belatedly, in parts of Amazonia such as Paragominas, where much

local forest is either razed or damaged, timber firms are coming to see

unharmed woodland as an asset that, properly managed, can yield a good income

forever. Their enthusiasm has been bolstered by studies showing that

"sustainable management" of forests, also known as "reduced-impact logging" (

RIL ), can be more profitable than the reckless conventional methods of timber

extraction. One such study, conducted near Paragominas, found that RIL was 12%

cheaper than conventional logging.

 

In RIL schemes, the area to be exploited is divided into perhaps 30 blocks,

one of which has timber extracted each year, before being left alone for 29

years. This is enough for the forest to regenerate successfully, because in

addition to rotation, the schemes take care to leave the oldest specimens of

the exploited species standing. As well as providing cover from the tropical

sun, the spreading branches of these tall trees re-seed the block with new

specimens. In haphazard, conventional logging, such trees are usually hacked

down and, because their trunks are often hollow or damaged, then abandoned-a

waste of time and money for the lumberjacks, as well as maiming the forest.

RIL reduces the damage further by plotting the position of each block's

valuable trees on a computer, which then works out the shortest set of access

roads that needs to be carved out to remove the felled trees. Lumberjacks are

also taught ways of felling trees that avoid damaging those around them.

 

With planning, the forest's animals, as well as its plants, can be preserved,

according to Adalberto Verissimo of Imazon, a local environmental-research

group. Amazonia's top predator, barring man, is the jaguar. This species needs

about 500kmA[superscript two] of forest to form a viable population of 50

cats. Though a typical managed-forestry scheme is only about a fifth of this

size, by ensuring that at least "corridors" of forest are maintained between

neighbouring schemes, the big cats and all the other animal species below them

in the food chain can, it is hoped, survive reasonably well. It should, in

other words, be possible for a stretch of forest to provide an endless supply

of tropical hardwood but still suffer a minimal impact on its ecosystem.

 

Sustainable forestry of this sort has been talked about in Brazil since at

least the 1980s, but started taking off only in the mid-1990s. Across the

country, including areas outside Amazonia, there are now thought to be

10,000kmA[superscript two] of forest under sustainable management. Foreign

consumers of tropical hardwoods-furniture makers and sellers, for instance-are

increasingly asking for timber that has been independently certified as coming

from well-run RIL schemes, so that they can promise their

environment-conscious customers that they are not contributing to the

destruction of the rainforest.

 

The Rosa Group, a big timber firm in Paragominas, started using RIL in 1998,

and is now applying for certification by the Forest Stewardship Council ( FSC

), an international agency that sets standards for sustainable forestry.

Antonio Rosa, the firm's boss, sees certification as key to his plan to expand

its exports to Europe and North America. Foreign buyers, he says, seem

prepared to pay extra for certified timber, making it even more attractive.

 

But most timber felled in Amazonia is used in Brazil, so the growth of

sustainable forestry-and the decline of reckless chopping-will depend on how

quickly Brazilian consumers switch to demanding certified timber. There are

signs that this is starting to happen. In 2000, 40 Brazilian firms, including

Tok & Stok, a big furniture retailer, formed a "buyers' group" to coordinate

their purchases of certified wood, and jointly pledged to stop using

uncertified timber by 2005. By creating a growing market for certified timber,

it is hoped, supply will grow too. Imazon is conducting what it believes is

the first-ever study of who distributes and buys timber in Brazil, to suggest

ways of accelerating the switch to sustainable forestry.

 

Since much of the rainforest is still untouched and unclaimed, and thus public

property according to Brazil's constitution, the federal and state governments

could accelerate the move to sustainability by declaring it all a national

park and then licensing timber firms to run RIL schemes in selected parts of

it. A study by Mr Verissimo and others for the environment ministry concluded

that just 10% of the remaining forest, managed sustainably, could meet all the

existing demand for tropical hardwood. Much of the rest might then be declared

untouchable.

 

In practice, policing such a huge preservation area against illegal logging

would be an immense task. A national park that existed only on paper would not

be worthy of the name. And Ibama, whose job it would be to patrol this park,

has a reputation for inefficiency and corruption. It seems to be improving,

but slowly. Timber firms in Paragominas say the local branch that inspects

them is now doing a reasonable job, but they complain of "unfair competition"

from surrounding regions where the agency is ineffective.

 

Some environmentalists say the answer is to take the job away from Ibama

(whose broad remit includes dealing with everything from oil slicks to urban

noise) and create a specialised body similar to America's Forestry Service.

Raimundo Deusdara, an environment-ministry official responsible for forest

preservation, agrees that the idea is worth considering. In the meantime, he

hopes that a new environment tax, to be introduced soon, will at least double

Ibama's budget, and thus make it more effective.

 

Another hindrance to the effort to control illegal logging has been that,

since Brazil lacks a central land register, it has been easy to steal publicly

owned forest. Only now has the federal government launched a campaign to seize

back the vast tracts of Amazonia that have been stolen over the years. A law

creating a land register has been passed, and the government hopes the

register will be compiled by 2003.

 

Combined with better land registration, improved satellite imaging should help

to monitor, and thus prevent, deforestation. Brazil's space-research agency,

INPE, currently produces its deforestation figures annually, but the

Chinese-Brazilian CBERS satellite it uses scans Amazonia once every 26 days,

so it is studying whether it could produce figures more frequently. Mato

Grosso state, which includes a small slice of Amazonian forest, is already

doing this on its own. A state laboratory is downloading satellite images and

comparing them with a computerised land register to spot breaches of the

often-flouted national forest code, which allows landowners in Amazonia to

deforest only 20% of their property, and even then, only with permission.

 

In theory, real-time detection of deforestation could be done for all of

Amazonia, according to Thelma Krug of INPE, especially after the launch, due

in 2004, of a Brazilian satellite that will provide images every two hours.

Sivam, Brazil's giant radar-surveillance system for Amazonia, is now being

brought into service. Though its main role is in defence, and to monitor the

traffic in illegal drugs, it could also be used to detect loggers' activities.

But collecting and processing such masses of data would be expensive. And, of

course, it would only be worthwhile if there were an effective forest service

which had enough wardens with boats, planes and helicopters to rush them to

remote areas where illegal logging had been spotted.

 

Encouraging sustainable timber extraction, and suppressing illegal logging,

are only part of what must be done to stop the rainforest being degraded and

destroyed. The other big threat is population pressure. Last year's census

found that about 12m people live in Amazonia, and that the population there is

increasing by 3.7% a year. So there is a growing need to find people ways of

making a living without despoiling the forest.

 

This was one of the objectives of the Pilot Programme to Conserve the

Brazilian Rain Forest, set up in 1992, with the promise of $350m from the

Group of Seven rich countries-hence its nickname, PPG7. All sorts of projects

were created to help forest dwellers make a living from such things as

collecting fruits and plants. But, as an independent review concluded last

year, progress has been very slow. Much of the $88m spent so far has been

swallowed up by bureaucracy, and many projects have not got beyond being

experiments (though PPG7 does pay for Mato Grosso's satellite-based

enforcement system, which has already resulted in the jailing of 50

landowners).

 

One reason for the poor results, the report concluded, is that the scheme has

done little to involve the private sector in creating forest-friendly

businesses. But, here and there, independently of the PPG7, this is beginning

to happen. In the Ilha de Marajo, an island twice the size of Wales at the

mouth of the Amazon, Muana Alimentos, a food-processing company, is working

with the local authorities to persuade the growing numbers of ribeirinhos

(riverbank dwellers) to cultivate the acai palms that grow abundantly in the

swampy land around their wooden huts. The company wants to expand the supply

of the two products it sells: palm heart, the soft inner stem at the tree top,

from which the fronds sprout, which is pickled and used in salads and pies;

and the pulp of the acaA- fruit, which is served as a delicious sorbet on

Brazil's poshest beaches.

 

Arriving in the settlement of Piria, Georges Schnyder, director of Muana

Alimentos, accompanies a state official on a boat trip to try to interest the

ribeirinhos in taking a short course in cultivating the trees to maximise

yields of fruit and palm hearts. "You could be earning 8,000 reais (about

$4,000) a year from this plot," Mr Schnyder tells Raimundo and Rubens, a

father and son who live nearby. The two smile politely but

disbelievingly-incredulous that what is a small fortune by local standards

might be within their grasp. The company already owns and tends its own plots

of land on the island, but Mr Schnyder says he would rather leave the

cultivation and processing to the locals and stick to being a distributor.

 

Like the lumberjacks in Paragominas, Mr Schnyder is seeking the FSC 's

certificate of sustainability, seeing it as a way to add value to his

products. Despite the PPG7 's poor progress, Mr Schnyder believes such schemes

to find sustainable livings for forest dwellers can be made to work. But, he

grumbles, environmental groups could do more to help: they seem keener on

sitting in their offices writing damning reports than on setting up local

branches in forest villages to foster sustainable development by offering

training and advice.

 

Politicians must change their ways too. Though many of the incentives that led

to chopping have gone, some persist. Amazonia's state governors opposed the

recent decision by Brazil's president, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, to abolish

Sudam, a corruption-riddled Amazonian "development" agency, whose handouts

have sponsored much futile forest clearance.

 

The military dictators who ran Brazil from 1964 to 1985 were obsessed with

populating and developing Amazonia, convinced that otherwise another power

might seize it. Such paranoia has died down (though many Amazonians believe

that America is plotting to invade on the pretext of saving the trees) but

Advance Brazil, the government's 776 billion reais economic-development plan,

still assumes that Amazonia needs to be opened up with new roads and

waterways. Yet a study published by William Laurence of the Smithsonian

Tropical Research Institute, and his colleagues, in Science in January, argued

that such transport links, when built near forests in the past, triggered

massive deforestation. Extrapolating from past patterns to forecast the

effects of the proposed roads and highways, the study said, at worst, only 5%

of Amazonia might remain as pristine forest in 2020, with a further 24% being

lightly degraded and the rest badly damaged or gone.

 

There are good reasons for hoping that things will not turn out so badly.

Brazil's growing fiscal prudence may mean not all of Advance Brazil advances.

It may also lead to further cuts in the remaining incentives to chop trees.

Past deforestation may not be a guide to the future, because it was mostly in

the drier fringes of Amazonia rather than the really rainy rainforest, where

agriculture would be even harder. The government has stopped settling landless

peasants in forested areas, which until recently had been a smaller but

significant cause of deforestation. And the reaction in Brazil and around the

world to the Science paper helped, by forcing the government to submit Advance

Brazil to an independent environmental-impact assessment.

 

Dr Laurence agrees that things may not turn out as badly as the paper's

bleakest prognostications. But, he argues, it is not so much Advance Brazil

that threatens the forest as the thinking behind the project. It assumes that

economic development depends on "extensifying", ie, extending the amount of

land in economic use, rather than intensifying the use of land already

exploited. Maybe so, says Raul Jungmann, Brazil's land-reform minister, but

the

 

trouble is that extensifying is cheaper and simpler than intensifying. If

richer countries want the Amazon rainforest saved (and, he correctly points

out, they are lecturing Brazil on preserving its forests after destroying much

of their own and their colonies'), they could offer more technology and

capital to intensify the return on Brazil's existing agricultural land.

 

Though economic development has often been depicted as the environment's

enemy, the richer a country gets, the more its people tend to worry about

environmental matters. It is encouraging that it was mainly Brazilian greens,

not foreign ones, who successfully campaigned last year against a plot by the

big landowners' lobby in Congress to weaken the forest code, and are

mobilising against a similar attempt this year.

 

Brazil has already lost one tropical forest: the Mata Atlantica, which used to

run all the way down the country's southern coast, but of which only 7% now

remains, and that divided into small fragments. It is too early to guarantee

the survival of the bigger, more famous one in Amazonia. Much more needs to be

done to stop it being eaten away by % or so each year. But its chances are

improving, especially now it is increasingly being seen as a valuable economic

asset, something that could produce returns forever.

                                                                             

                                -- End --