Actions against sustainability: Dismantling of the environmental policies in Brazil
Introduction
In democratic societies reliable legal system are more common than in autocratic ones (Li and Reuveny, 2006), and consequently environmental governance and compliance is expected in democracies. This is mainly pivotal in megadiverse countries, where natural resources can be a plentiful capital and important for human well-fare including socio-economic issues (Díaz et al., 2015, Pelicice et al., 2017).
As expected, and argued by scientists before the elections (Magnusson et al., 2018) Bolsonaro administration started a setback way of a long-time Brazilian environmental positive policy through changing federal environmental laws. Since 1965, Brazilian federal environmental laws registered successive advances associated with the increase of the legal devices and monitoring systems (Fig. 1 blue sequence) based on popular participation and expertise advice. For more than 50 years there was a large and cumulative interest of Brazilian society to improve federal environmental law, generating a gradual strengthening of environmental preservation mechanisms. Launched in 2012 to replace the Forest Code of 1965, the Native Vegetation Protection Law of Brazil has positive and negative consequences to the environment (Brancalion et al., 2016). In the same way, the Biodiversity Law although regulates the access to genetic heritage and traditional knowledge, its increased bureaucracy and hamper necessary research on biodiversity (Alves et al., 2018). Because these both laws are controversial, they are exhibited in grey colour at Fig. 1.
With a large Protected Area system, Brazil had a protagonist role as a worldwide leader in environmental governance for two decades. However, there was a clear tentative to weakness environmental legal framework since 2014 (Ferreira et al., 2014), and also a cut-off funding of research to environmental monitoring (Magnusson et al., 2018) and a reduced public spending in federal Protected Areas between 2013 and 2016 (Silva et al., 2019). This tentative of changes in environmental laws was presented as a current proposal in form of Law Proposal “PL” (proposta de lei in Portuguese) but it did not turn a federal law. In fact, such dismantling of environmental legal framework began in 2019, promoted the increase of the human pressure on the biodiversity and ecosystems across the country. This process has been facilitated by the weakening of legal environmental framework and, under the leadership of the current Minister of Environment of Bolsonaro administration, launched a sequence of federal laws clearly against the nature preservation (Fig. 1 red sequence).
Among the consequences, medium and long-term effects on habitat and species loss are expected, with major damage to Brazilian biodiversity, and therefore, to aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems functioning. These are some of the consequences of the decrease in legal inspection devices, the dismantling of environmental inspection and control agencies, and the reduction of 96–23 members of popular participation mechanisms in agencies such as National Council of Environment (CONAMA in Portuguese acronym) (Thomaz et al., 2020). This is part of the strategy to close space for dialogue. The article 225 of the Brazilian Constitution clearly describes the role of the Federal government and the Brazilian people in environmental defence and preservation. However, the absence of commitment to environmental conservation of the current federal government exposes the failure to comply with these principles, including the lack of maintenance of environmental conservation policies, climate agreements, and combat Amazon deforestation. Below follow some details of recent examples gathered from the literature.
Section snippets
Increase of Amazon deforestation and weakening of the legal regulations
In 2020, Deforestation in the Amazon had the highest percentage increase in the last 10 years, with a peak in last April in the State of Pará, according to data provided by the Deforestation Alert System (SAD) (Fonseca et al., 2020) and that was criticized by Brazilian government (Escobar, 2019b). Besides the irreparable biodiversity loss, deforestation progress has serious consequences on a global scale, such as a higher incidence of droughts and climate extremes, and increased CO2 release (
The pesticides release: would that be a good strategy to improve crop production?
This step backwards in the conservation politics encouraged an increase of the pressure for expansion of the agriculture frontiers (such as corn, maze, soy), livestock (cattle ranching), and other predatory activities, promoting serious changes in agriculture production. Hence, since the beginning of the current government, approximately 551 pesticides have been released, of which 30–35% are considered potentially carcinogenic by international regulatory agencies and prohibited by the European
Effectiveness of the combat of environmental crisis: oil spill and other harmful substances
The recent and constant failures in the coordination and management of environmental crises, as well as steep investment reductions, were evidenced during the episode of the oil spill that contaminated the Brazilian coast in 2019. In this case, even with the occurrence of high contamination levels, the Contingency Plan for Oil Pollution Incidents was not activated, although it was provided for by law (Decree No. 8127 of October 22, 2013). Thus, the gradual weakening of the Risk Management and
Uncontrolled fire in Pantanal
Pantanal is the largest wetlands of the Earth and houses of Ramsar sites (https://www.ramsar.org/wetland/brazil) and it is has been severely burned recently. Between January and August of 2020 around 12% of this Biome was destroyed by fires. Meteorologists argued that fires were intensifying in 2020 due to higher temperatures and little rainfall, and this can be worse with the forecast of a temperature rise of up to 7 °C by the end of this century (Marengo et al., 2015).
In Pantanal it is common
CRediT authorship contribution statement
LGB and CEVG conceived the manuscript; LGB compiled the data; and LGB, CEVG and MASA wrote the manuscript.
Acknowledgments
Authors had grants from CNPq (Produtividade em Pesquisa numbers 306579/2018-9 to MASA and 311674/2019/4 to CEVG) and FAPERJ (CNE process E-26/202.835/2018 to MASA). Also, we thanks support from Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia – Ecologia, Evolução e Conservação da Biodiversidade, and PPBio/CNPq/MCTic. The Brazilian Society for the Advancement of Science (SBPC, in Portuguese) to support through the Environmental Working Group.
References (20)
- et al.
A critical analysis of the native vegetation protection law of Brazil (2012): updates and ongoing initiatives
Nat. Conserv.
(2016) - et al.
The IPBES conceptual framework — Connecting nature and people
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
(2015) - et al.
Public spending in federal protected areas in Brazil
Land Use Policy
(2019) - et al.
Brazilian legislation on genetic heritage harms biodiversity convention goals and threatens basic biology research and education
Acad. Bras. Cienc.
(2018) - et al.
Removing the abyss between conservation science and policy decisions in Brazil
Biodivers. Conserv.
(2017) - et al.
Thresholds of freshwater biodiversity in response to riparian vegetation loss in the neotropical region
J. Appl. Ecol.
(2020) Bolsonaro’s first moves have Brazilian scientists worried
Science
(2019)Brazilian president attacks deforestation data
Science
(2019)- et al.
Brazil’s environmental leadership at risk
Science
(2014) - et al.
Boletim do desmatamento da Amazônia Legal (maio 2020) SAD (p. 1)
(2020)
Cited by (83)
Improving the knowledge management of marine megafauna strandings
2024, Journal of Environmental ManagementTransition to sustainability: Assessing the challenges of the Brazilian environmental agenda and policy
2023, Forest Policy and EconomicsTopic evolution in urban studies: Tracking back and moving forward
2023, Journal of Urban Management(Mis) perception of environmental laws: Modeling challenges based on information source preferences
2023, Environmental Impact Assessment ReviewThe São Paulo State (Brazil) Ecological Fiscal Transfer: Distributive and environmental effects
2023, Perspectives in Ecology and ConservationViewpoint: Sovereignty and reversing Brazil's history of Amazon destruction
2023, Land Use Policy