12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Proposed Legislation to Mine Brazil's Indigenous Lands Will Threaten Amazon Forests and Their Valuable Ecosystem Services

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A recent proposal to regulate mining within Indigenous Lands (ILs) threatens people and the unique ecosystems of Brazil's Legal Amazon. Here, we show that this new policy could eventually affect more than 863,000 km 2 of tropical forests—20% more than under current policies—assuming all known mineral deposits will be developed and impacts of mining on forests extend 70 km from lease boundaries. Not only are these forests home to some of the world's most culturally diverse communities, they also provide at least US $5 billion each year to the global economy, producing food, mitigating carbon emissions, and regulating climate for agriculture and energy production. It is unclear whether new mines within ILs will be required to compensate for their direct and indirect environmental and social impacts but failing to do so will have considerable environmental and social consequences.

          Graphical Abstract

          Highlights

          • Mining within Indigenous Lands may impact 20% more forests than the current scenario

          • Proposed bill could affect forests providing at least $5 billion in ecosystem services annually

          • Impact assessments must comply with best practices to safeguard ecosystems and people

          Science for Society

          In February 2020, Brazilian President Bolsonaro signed a bill (PL 191/2020) that would permit mining inside Indigenous Lands, a unique category of protected area covering 23% of the Legal Amazon. In this study, we assess the potential impacts of this proposed legislation. We find that this proposal threatens 863,000 km 2 of Amazon forests. These forests are home to 222 culturally unique indigenous groups and provide more than US $5 billion annually to society. The social and environmental impacts caused by new mines will unlikely be mitigated given the lack of environmental requirements and safeguards to indigenous rights in the current proposal. This policy could have long-lasting negative effects for Brazil's socio-biodiversity.

          Abstract

          The impacts of proposed legislation to allow mining within Indigenous Lands in the Brazilian Amazon could affect a large extent of forests—up to 20% more than the potentially affected area under current trends of mining expansion. These forests are home to 222 culturally unique indigenous groups, and it is estimated to provide more than US $5 billion annually in benefits for society; their loss will impact Brazil's socio-biodiversity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Role of Brazilian Amazon protected areas in climate change mitigation.

          Protected areas (PAs) now shelter 54% of the remaining forests of the Brazilian Amazon and contain 56% of its forest carbon. However, the role of these PAs in reducing carbon fluxes to the atmosphere from deforestation and their associated costs are still uncertain. To fill this gap, we analyzed the effect of each of 595 Brazilian Amazon PAs on deforestation using a metric that accounts for differences in probability of deforestation in areas of pairwise comparison. We found that the three major categories of PA (indigenous land, strictly protected, and sustainable use) showed an inhibitory effect, on average, between 1997 and 2008. Of 206 PAs created after the year 1999, 115 showed increased effectiveness after their designation as protected. The recent expansion of PAs in the Brazilian Amazon was responsible for 37% of the region's total reduction in deforestation between 2004 and 2006 without provoking leakage. All PAs, if fully implemented, have the potential to avoid 8.0 +/- 2.8 Pg of carbon emissions by 2050. Effectively implementing PAs in zones under high current or future anthropogenic threat offers high payoffs for reducing carbon emissions, and as a result should receive special attention in planning investments for regional conservation. Nevertheless, this strategy demands prompt and predictable resource streams. The Amazon PA network represents a cost of US$147 +/- 53 billion (net present value) for Brazil in terms of forgone profits and investments needed for their consolidation. These costs could be partially compensated by an international climate accord that includes economic incentives for tropical countries that reduce their carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Governance regime and location influence avoided deforestation success of protected areas in the Brazilian Amazon.

            Protected areas in tropical countries are managed under different governance regimes, the relative effectiveness of which in avoiding deforestation has been the subject of recent debates. Participants in these debates answer appeals for more strict protection with the argument that sustainable use areas and indigenous lands can balance deforestation pressures by leveraging local support to create and enforce protective regulations. Which protection strategy is more effective can also depend on (i) the level of deforestation pressures to which an area is exposed and (ii) the intensity of government enforcement. We examine this relationship empirically, using data from 292 protected areas in the Brazilian Amazon. We show that, for any given level of deforestation pressure, strictly protected areas consistently avoided more deforestation than sustainable use areas. Indigenous lands were particularly effective at avoiding deforestation in locations with high deforestation pressure. Findings were stable across two time periods featuring major shifts in the intensity of government enforcement. We also observed shifting trends in the location of protected areas, documenting that between 2000 and 2005 strictly protected areas were more likely to be established in high-pressure locations than in sustainable use areas and indigenous lands. Our findings confirm that all protection regimes helped reduce deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Brazil’s new president and ‘ruralists’ threaten Amazonia’s environment, traditional peoples and the global climate

              Summary Jair Bolsonaro (Brazil’s new president) and “ruralists” (large landholders and their representatives) have initiated a series of measures that threaten Amazonia’s environment and traditional peoples, as well as global climate. These include weakening the country’s environmental agencies and forest code, granting amnesty to deforestation, approving harmful agrochemicals, reducing protected areas, and denying the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Both the measures themselves and the expectation of impunity they encourage have spurred increased deforestation, which contributes to climate change and to land conflicts with traditional peoples. Countries and companies that import Brazilian beef, soy and minerals are stimulating these impacts.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                One Earth
                Elsevier Inc.
                2590-3322
                2590-3322
                18 September 2020
                18 September 2020
                18 September 2020
                : 3
                : 3
                : 356-362
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Escola Politécnica, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
                [2 ]Centro de Sensoriamento Remoto, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil
                [3 ]Instituto Socioambiental, 01238-001 São Paulo, SP, Brazil
                [4 ]School of Environmental and Earth Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author
                [5]

                Lead Contact

                Article
                S2590-3322(20)30417-6
                10.1016/j.oneear.2020.08.008
                7500344
                34173538
                0ad2a066-dcaa-4097-8a38-287b9c275f4a
                © 2020 Elsevier Inc.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 26 March 2020
                : 29 June 2020
                : 21 August 2020
                Categories
                Article

                indigenous rights,policy impact assessment,socio-biodiversity,paddd,environmental impact assessment,science-policy interface,biodiversity,protected areas

                Comments

                Comment on this article