LATIN AMERICAN ANALYSIS: ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND DEFORESTATION
LATIN AMERICAN ANALYSIS: ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY AND DEFORESTATION (from an article by Carla Almeida in SciDev.Net
[info@scidev.net]; Feb. 21, 2013)
When
it comes to the environment, there is no dialogue between civil society, the
scientific community, government and parliament, says Carla Almeida.
In a year that was marked by bad news on
the environmental front — the polar ice caps melting at an increasing rate, the
decline in biodiversity, the failure to reach agreement on climate change,
amongst other things — the release of data, at the end of 2012, showing a fall
in deforestation in the Amazon, one of the most important biomes in the world,
came as a relief.
The latest figures would seem to indicate
that the country is only four per cent shy of reaching its goal. But the
Amazon's monthly deforestation alert system is already showing a marked
increase in the area cleared in the last five months of 2012. Why is the
concern for the environment, which is increasing in Brazil and other Latin
American countries, and which is expressed through new environmental policies
and growing social awareness, still not being translated into positive,
sustained results?
Whilst Brazil is busy creating a global
image of a country that is heavily involved in the environment debate,
domestically it is encouraging oil exploration, promoting a return to mining —
even in the Amazon — resorting to hydroelectricity, and relaxing environmental
legislation.
f all these measures, one worth noting
is the new forest code, enacted by President Dilma Rousseff in October 2012,
after 13 years of debate in Parliament and three years of intense disputes
between environmentalists, rural campaigners and the government.
In its previous incarnation, the law dated back to 1965, regulates land use and establishes where indigenous vegetation should be preserved. But the present law, drawn up by those whose main concern is agribusiness, with no input from the scientific community nor from civil society, reduces the percentage of indigenous vegetation to be preserved on rural properties; ignores vegetation growing alongside intermittent watercourses; and changes the way fines resulting from the reclamation of damaged areas are charged.
In its previous incarnation, the law dated back to 1965, regulates land use and establishes where indigenous vegetation should be preserved. But the present law, drawn up by those whose main concern is agribusiness, with no input from the scientific community nor from civil society, reduces the percentage of indigenous vegetation to be preserved on rural properties; ignores vegetation growing alongside intermittent watercourses; and changes the way fines resulting from the reclamation of damaged areas are charged.
Brazil is not the only Latin American
country to introduce new environmental legislation. A new Bolivian law on
forestry establishes that, in order to reduce fines and avoid having their
properties confiscated by the State, those producers guilty of illegal
deforestation prior to 2011 must reforest the deforested areas for five years
and/or produce food to supply the domestic market for the same period of time.
In this way, the law aims to increase domestic food production by 20 per cent,
without sacrificing the environment. But some doubt just how efficient these
new measures are in a country marked by increasing deforestation, little
auditing, and a strong agro-industrial lobby.
Cases such as those of Brazil and Bolivia
help to explain the modest impact made by environmental policy and social
awareness in Latin American coutries in which there is no shortage of legal
frameworks, government programmes, and public policy for protecting the
environment. What is in short supply are the resources, the infrastructure,
and, above all, the political will to implement and audit these directives,
thus ensuring that they are appropriately adhered to.
No-one would deny that these countries
need to increase agricultural production, be it to provide food for their
people or to improve their balance of trade; however, linking that increase to
greater deforestation is the worst option possible. In order to really preserve
the environment, what will be necessary is learning how to reconcile the
increasing demand for food and agribusiness concerns in Latin America, with the
global need to maintain biodiversity and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
(*)
Carla Almeida is a
Brazilian science journalist, editor of Ciência Hoje On-line,
a science communication website
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario