Vanni Filloramo (Junior Researcher G.E.O. Environment)
Abstract
The Amazon Forest stands as the world's most important carbon dioxide absorbing machine. Its functions allow it to mitigate global warming and bestow on it the nickname of 'earth's lungs'. Covering an area of about 670 million hectares, the Amazon basin is the largest tropical forest in the world. It also accounts for 10% of the world's biodiversity and a major source of water (20% of the global total). The main purpose of this article is to investigate the reasons behind Brazil's Amazon deforestation and the political impasse that has allowed the Bolsonaro administration to take such a brave stand towards a policy of disinvolvement in the protection of the Amazon as a national (and planetary) treasure. The second part of the present article will focus on the norms and laws that have been eroded by the aforementioned power dynamics,permitting a different and irresponsible approach towards privatisation and land-grabbing policies.
The Amazon rainforest during the Bolsonaro administration
During Bolsonaro's time in office at the Palacio do Planalto, man-made deforestation has seen an important peak in the Amazon, prompting the Western world to take a strong stand towards Brasilia. Lula's triumph in the recently held elections might mark a watershed moment in Brazilian politics in general, and a significant turning point in the Amazon dispute. The office switch, however, might prove to be not sufficient to alter the current situation. Political polarisation and corporatism still stand as Brazilian politics' most cogent shortcomings. (The Economist, 2023; Carnegie Endowment, 2021)
Referred to as 'Captain Chansaw', former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro began his direct attack on Amazon's safety by firstly gutting fundings intended for agencies protecting the rainforest. Numerous fires have been spotted in the inner parts of the rainforest's mass, used as a tool for clearing land for ranching. In 2019 alone, twice as many fires were detected than in the entirety of 2018. Should the situation of clearing and deforestation continue in the near future at current rates, WWF estimates that by 2030 a quarter of the entire Amazon biome will be lost. (WWF, 2020; BBC News Brasil, 2022)
The consequences of the current process are innumerable and are not limited to the reduction in the world's capacity to absorb greenhouse gases, of which the Amazon is certainly the most important cog, but extend to regional consequences such as: an increase in flooding due to the inability of the remaining trees to absorb the water produced by rainfall; drying up of the soil, which would normally be nourished by the forest foliage; and a drastic impoverishment of local biodiversity. (Vox, 2019)
From a social point of view, the damage done to the forest directly affects the local and indigenous populations, already suffering within the national socio-cultural substratum a complex situation of civil subalternity (UNESCO, 2023).
In reality, the profits derived from the deforestation of the Amazon are much lower than the social costs of the phenomenon. The plots obtained from deforestation prove to be poorly fertile and the average price is around USD 1,200 per hectare, while for every 500 tonnes of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere, environmental damage is estimated at around USD 25,000. (The Economist, 2023)
Corporatism and policy dismantling in Bolsonaro’s Brazil
The process of the so-called policy dismantling, i.e. the erosion and erasure of pre-existing policies, underlies the global phenomenon known in political science as ‘democracy backsliding’. In the specific context of Bolsonarist Brazil, the process of erasure and termination of pre-existing policies has added to the parallel process of manipulation of policy capacities. In its first 100 days in office alone, the Bolsonaro administration embarked on the 'revogaço', a process of cancellation of 250 executive orders implemented by its predecessors since 1901, all made public through the Decree number 9,757. (planalto.gov, 2019)
Jair Bolsonaro, widely known for his unwavering appreciation of the military dictatorship that administered the country with an iron fist between 1964 and 1985, has used the process of policy dismantling during his term in office in an attempt to wear down the democratic structures that limit the state's decision-making capacity. This process consists of a gradual erosion of the country's legal and juridical institutions through a manipulation of the bureaucracy and what is jargonily known as the Deep State, i.e. the set of public and private interests that feed and sustain the state machine in its functioning. Through the lenses of transnational comparative politics, there is a clear tendency for populist and illiberal governments and policymakers to use this process of undermining civil institutions in an attempt to secure a greater hold on the state. (Vox, 2022)
The issue of fires in the Amazon basin and the resulting land-grabbing is no exception. From the policy-capacity manipulation process that has been put in place by the previous administration has resulted a bureaucracy reshuffling. Now, despite the election of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva representing a clear change of direction even with regard to the Amazon issue, a coalition of cattle ranchers, mining businessmen and exporters of commodities (wood, minerals, etc.) whose immediate economic and financial interests are directly legitimised and supported by their political influence, has been strengthening during the four years of the Bolsonarist administration. These lobbies who exert strong pressure on the authorities, are actively engaged in the pursuit of blocking and circumventing state-sponsored environmental policies, which thus ensure perpetrators of environmental crimes almost total impunity. (ISPI, 2018; Paumgartten, 2016)
The reciprocal relationship of aid and benefit that binds lobbyists and political decision-makers in double-tie allows the former to directly influence the election of candidates, who, once elected, return the favour by supporting their economic interests through the relaxation and cancellation of regulations already in force. Far from being a place devoid of crime, the interior regions of the Amazon mass are now the lair of smugglers and criminals of all kinds, tacitly safeguarded by an absent police force, less and less involved in controlling the areas in question. (Mongabay, 2021)
The greatest difficulty for Lula will be to balance opposing interests in the depths of the state machine, a hot spot that will make it complex for the new administration to disassociate itself from the trend of the previous one. Recent technological innovations, enlivened by the emergence of artificial intelligence, in tandem with the use of exponentially clearer and more precise satellite imagery, could represent a new frontier in the monitoring and preservation of the Amazon mass. (Chatham House, 2021)
Allowing the coexistence of a spirit of environmental preservation with the interests of lobbies involved in the deregulated exploitation of the Amazon rainforest is actually possible. Analysed in a Chatham House report of 2021, the problem is rationalised through the possibility of a joint solution whose intrinsic structure must be devoted to legality and sustainability. An increase in agricultural productivity and social inclusion, in this sense, could prove to be an interesting possibility, especially considering that the production of goods such as pepper and palm oil has already proven to be effective in the past decades in recovering degraded land. A strengthening of the local economy in internal states such as Rondônia, moreover, would certainly also have positive outcomes at the socioeconomic level, in a context where the economy is still too closely linked to urban realities (e.g. Paragominas, Altamira and Tailândia). (Ibid., 2021)
Although the figures for the extent of deforestation were numerically more alarming during Lula's first term as president, the trend was decidedly the reverse in the years that followed after the 2005 peak compared to the one witnessed with the Bolsonaro administration, which grew substantially until the end of his term. (Vox, 2019)
Lobbying as the main obstacle towards a solution to the problem
The phenomenon of lobbying, characterised in Brazil by a strong systemic opacity, is actually present and more or less prominent in all Western democracies. It is, in practice, the capacity for influence generated and exerted by a group, or more specifically an organisation, towards legislators and government officials. The phenomenon, when it occurs in a transparent manner and does not involve means other than the use of the logos, can be an intrinsic part of the democratic system and is not unethical per se. The Brazilian case, however, due to the specific characteristics of the context in which it occurs (deregulation and lack of a registration system for professional lobbyists), presents illegal and amoral dynamics. Persuasion might therefore occur through the granting of benefits, purely corrupt phenomena and bribery. (Paumgartten, 2016)
On the eve of Jair Bolsonaro's election as Brazil's new president, the slice of politicians directly entangled with the national agribusiness (known as the 'ruralistas' and directly affiliated to an association called the “União Democrática Ruralista”), directly responsible for deforestation in the Amazon, present in the upper chamber of the Republic was 44%. The day after his election, the new president appointed one of his protégés, Ricardo Salles, an exponent of the 'ruralist' camp in Parliament and former Secretary for the Environment of the State of Sao Paulo, as Minister of the Environment. Salles, a faithful spokesperson for the theory that climate change is not an anthropogenic process, but part of a broader natural phenomenon of cyclical warming and cooling of the atmosphere, was condemned in 2018 for altering the zoning of protected natural environments under his jurisdiction. (Ferrante and Fearnside, 2019)
Specifically, the Bolsonaro administration has been committed from the outset to the weakening of the authority held by IBAMA, the federal environmental agency primarily responsible for controlling and supervising the process of deforestation in the Amazon in compliance with binding regulations. A reshuffling of IBAMA's superintendence in 21 of the respective 27 Brazilian states has in this sense pushed the agency towards a greater realignment to the interests of the administration, ending up producing the worst performance in its history in 2019. (Ibid., 2019; Vox, 2019)
All this has certainly also affected the condition of the indigenous minorities in the Amazonian depths, to whom the Brazilian Constitution grants specific reserves roughly corresponding to the lands of origin of their culture (subject to proof of the veracity of the aforementioned claims) within which they are granted the exclusive exploitation of the resources contained therein. As of 2019, however, the new administration has committed itself to undermining the legal foundations on which this reality rests, weakening and depowering the National Indian Foundation (FUNAI), which was previously responsible for demarcating the areas destined for indigenous peoples, later transferred to the Ministry of Agriculture, at the time still firmly under ruralist control. (Ferrante and Fearnside, 2019; UNESCO, 2023)
A legal overview
The international context
Internationally, there are laws protecting the Brazilian Amazon Rainforest structured in an intricate set of legal instruments aimed at preserving one of the planet's vital ecosystems. As the custodian of a significant portion of the Amazon rainforest, Brazil is subject to several international agreements.
The first is the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), signed by Brazil in 1994, which requires contracting states to adopt measures for the conservation of species and ecosystems and a fair and equitable sharing of the benefits derived from the use of genetic resources. It is immediately clear on this occasion in the eyes of the international community that Brazil, 'prime defender' of the Amazon rainforest, is placed in a delicate position between the socio-economic development of its own country (the export of soya beans and red meat to foreign countries is crucial to its economic success) and the protection of the biodiversity of which the country itself is representative. Article 6 states that each contracting party shall:
"a) Develop national strategies, plans or programmes for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity or adapt for this purpose existing strategies... b) Integrate, as far as possible and as appropriate, the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity into relevant sectoral or cross-sectoral plans". (Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992)
Subsequently, the Paris Agreement, adopted in December 2015 at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21), represented another crucial step in global efforts towards climate change mitigation. However, this agreement, which proved to be unsatisfactory in its intentions and results, could have represented an excellent instrument of protection for the Amazon ecosystem at the time, given its essential role in global climate regulation. The treaty commits countries to take concrete measures to limit the global average temperature increase to below 2°C compared to pre-industrial levels. In both cases, the theory of enunciations has not been slavishly followed through with the implementation of concrete practices to protect biodiversity or to control global temperatures rise. Brazil, therefore, in light of the ambitious 2015 agreement, can be considered to have failed to meet its Paris commitments due to the previous administration's policy choices on deforestation and agricultural development.
However, to the surprise of the international community, in June 2022 the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court attributed to the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement the nature of a human rights treaty, profiling a new jurisprudential orientation absolutely unprecedented by Brazil, being the first time that a Supreme Court has qualified in terms of human rights protection an international covenanted source on climate matters. This decision, rendered within the framework of a legal procedure called 'Ação de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental' (ADPF), a form of access to justice in Brazil used to verify violations of the fundamental principles of the Constitution and declare the constitutional obligations of public authorities, is regulated by Law No. 9.882/1999 and is at the same time an important instrument of concentrated control of constitutionality. The ADPF can only be filed if other mechanisms of constitutionality control are not applicable, and is open to specific entities, including the President of the Republic, the Presidents of the Legislative Chambers, the Attorney General of the Republic and other entities. The decision taken in an ADPF has binding effects on all public authorities and is not subject to appeal.
In the specific case of ADPF No. 708, it was filed in 2020 against the federal government of Brazil by four political parties and civil society organisations. The action focused on the federal government's decision to reduce funding to the 'Fundo Nacional para o Clima' (National Fund for Climate Change), contrary to the laws regulating its operation. It was argued that this decision violated the principle of separation of powers and that the government had also changed the composition of the responsible body, emphasising its political component. Brazil's Federal Supreme Court (STF) rejected the government's arguments, ruling that it is not within the executive power's possibilities to ignore the body's founding laws and that it has the constitutional duty to finance the Climate Mitigation Fund. By thus elevating the Paris Agreement to an international source of human rights, it enjoys a privileged position in the hierarchy of Brazilian legal sources, as it cannot be derogated by other domestic laws. (diritticomparati.it, 2022)
The domestic context
Domestically, the main law governing the management of the Amazonian heritage is the Brazilian Forest Code (Lei 12.651/2012). The Code, in its original version of 1965, aims to regulate the conservation of forest areas by defining the rules for the use of the land, demarcating areas for timber production, land dedicated for farming and Areas of Permanent Preservation (APPs). However, especially under Bolsonaro's tenure, the law has undergone numerous amendments that have weakened its effectiveness and sparked controversy and debate, polarising public opinion both nationally and internationally. The law, initially introduced to balance agricultural and environmental needs, establishes criteria for the conservation of legal reserves and APPs on rural properties. Under the legislation, farmers were required to reserve a certain percentage of their land for environmental conservation (between 20 and 80 per cent of their properties), thus actively contributing to the protection of native forests. (planalto.gov, 2012)
Conclusions
The present article describes the condition of the Amazon basin during the years of Bolsonaro's presidency, with a particular focus on the first half of his mandate, and the political and legal conditions that have allowed or favoured an unregulated attitude of Brazilian agribusinesses and mining companies. It is therefore possible to sketch a faint consideration regarding the difficulties that a disengagement in the exploitation of the forest's resources, necessary, among other things, to meet the COP21 targets on climate warming, presents on the horizon of Brazil's future. Finding a balance between the country's economic expectations, firmly anchored to the export of strategic goods to foreign countries (above all China and the USA), and the preservation of an environment fundamental to the survival not only of the region, but of the entire globe, remains the focal point of the situation. A process of legal regulation under the banner of sustainable exploitation of the unprotected areas of the forest basin and a reinforcement of the laws and regulations that preceded the political rise of the 'ruralistas' in the Brazilian Parliament, responsible for an unregulated and uninformed approach to deforestation for agricultural purposes, are therefore fundamental steps to recovering a situation whose outcomes, certainly dramatic, could represent the beginning of an unprecedented ecological disaster.
Classification of sources and information:
1 | Confirmed | Confirmed by other independent sources; logical in itself; coherent with other information on the topic |
2 | Presumably true | Not confirmed; logical in itself; coherent with other information on the topic |
3 | Maybe true | Not confirmed; reasonably logical in itself; coherent with some other information on the topic |
4 | Uncertain | Not confirmed; possible but not logical in itself; no other information on the topic |
5 | Improbable | Not confirmed; not logical in itself; contradicts with other information on the topic |
6 | Not able to be evaluated | No basis to evaluate the validity of the information |
Trustworthiness of the source | ||
A | Trustworthy | No doubt about authenticity, reliability or competence; has a history of total trustworthiness |
B | Normally trustworthy | Small doubts about authenticity, reliability or competence, nevertheless has a history of valid information in a majority of cases |
C | Sufficiently trustworthy | Doubts about authenticity, reliability or competence; however, has supplied valid information in the past |
D | Normally not trustworthy | Significant doubt about authenticity, reliability or competence, however has supplied valid information in the past |
E | Not trustworthy | Lack of authenticity, reliability or competence; history of invalid information |
F | Not able to be evaluated | No basis to evaluate the validity of the information |
Bibliography
BBC News Brasil, “Bolsonaro ou Lula: qual governo teve desmatamento maior na Amazônia?” (2022) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1liP_bEb2Eg&t=433s B-2
Carnegie Endowment, “Brazil’s Polarization and Democratic Risks” (2021) https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/02/17/brazil-s-polarization-and-democratic-risks-pub-83783 A-2
Chatham House, “Rethinking the Brazilian Amazon” (2022) https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/08/democracy-brazil A-2
Diritti Comparati, “L’Accordo di Parigi sul clima come fonte a tutela dei diritti umani nella giurisprudenza del Supremo Tribunale brasiliano” (2022) https://www.diritticomparati.it/laccordo-di-parigi-sul-clima-come-fonte-a-tutela-dei-diritti-umani-nella-giurisprudenza-del-supremo-tribunale-federale-brasiliano/ B-1
F. J. R. Paumgartten. (2016) Pharmaceutical lobbying in Brazil: a missing topic in the public health research agenda. Revista de Saude Publica; 50: 70. A-1
Igarape, “Crime ambiental na Bacia Amazônica: Uma tipologia para Pesquisa, Politica Publica e Acao” (2020) https://igarape.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020-08-19_E-47_Crime-Ambiental-Amazonia-Tipologia-PT.pdf A-2
ISPI, “Il Brasile di Bolsonaro” (2018) https://www.ispionline.it/it/pubblicazione/il-brasile-di-bolsonaro-21529 A-2
L. Ferrante & P. M. Fearnside. (2019) Brazil’s new president and ‘ruralists’ threaten Amazonia’s environment, traditional peoples and the global climate. Environmental Conservation; Vol. 46 (4), 261-263. A-1
M. de Sá e Silva. (2022) Policy dismantling by capacity manipulation in a context of democratic backsliding: The bureaucracy in disarray in Bolsonaro’s Brazil. International Review of Public Policy, Vol. 4 (3), 272-292. A-1
Mongabay, “‘Stampede’ of legislation threatens accelerated destruction of the Amazon” (2021) https://news.mongabay.com/2021/07/stampede-of-legislation-threatens-accelerated-destruction-of-the-amazon/ B-1
Planalto, (2019) http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2019/decreto/D9757.htm A-1
Planalto, (2012) https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2012/lei/l12651.htm A-1
The Economist, “Lula’s ambitious plans to save the Amazon clash with reality” (2023) https://www.economist.com/the-americas/2023/06/13/lulas-ambitious-plans-to-save-the-amazon-clash-with-reality B-1
The Economist, “Saving the rainforest would be a bargain” (2023) https://www.economist.com/leaders/2023/03/02/saving-the-rainforests-would-be-a-bargain B-1
UNESCO, “Los pueblos indigenas un escudo contra la deforestacion” (2023) https://courier.unesco.org/es/articles/los-pueblos-indigenas-un-escudo-contra-la-deforestacion B-1
Vox, “Brazil's indigenous land is being invaded” (2019) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAZAKPUQMw0 B-2
Vox, “The destruction of the Amazon, explained” (2019) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGjRNbXeRXI&t=0s B-2
Vox, “The biggest corruption scandal in Latin America’s history” (2018) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMXumMJZYYI B-2