Amazon, land protection initiatives have reduced deforestation by 83%

In the first decade of the century, the Amazon experienced a sharp decline in deforestation, explains an international study. But the economic benefits for the indigenous people have been limited. This is why new initiatives are needed

by Matteo Cavallito

 

Land protection initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon have reduced deforestation levels by up to 83% between 2000 and 2010. This is supported by international research published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. These are ‘impressive results’ che ‘highlight the vital role of land protection policies in achieving ambitious goals, including the UN biodiversity target to protect 30% of the planet’s surface by 2030,’ explains a statement released by the authors. The economic impact of protection initiatives, however, has not been fully satisfactory. Especially for the indigenous peoples who have always been the country’s most disadvantaged social group.

The study, which involved researchers from several universities (including Manchester, Sheffield, Stockholm, Boston, Rio de Janeiro and Canberra), has highlighted in any case the need to develop more ambitious solutions in the coming years, following the improvements recorded in recent times. “Although deforestation rates in the Brazilian Amazon have recently declined,” says the statement, “the region still lost 5,000 square kilometres of rainforest in 2023 – equivalent to three times the size of greater London.”

Less deforestation but few economic benefits

The researchers examined three different protection agreements: those for the protection of indigenous territories (IT), which are based on the restitution of ancestral land and resources to indigenous peoples; agreements on so-called Strict protected areas (SPAs), which ban all activities except those with a minor impact; and Sustainable use protected areas (SUPAs), which allow the sustainable use of natural resources but forbid the development of large-scale industrial production in the area.

The focus of the survey was to compare environmental and socio-economic results by assessing the differences between protected and unprotected areas (used for agriculture and mining) and analysing the impact of the choices made for the environment and people.

According to the researchers, “ITs reduced deforestation relative to all alternative land uses (48–83%) but had smaller socio-economic benefits (incomes were up to 36% lower in Indigenous Territories than in other differently protected areas, ed.)”. At the same time, “By contrast, SUPAs, and potentially SPAs, did not reduce deforestation relative to small-scale agriculture (landholdings <10 ha) but did so relative to larger agricultural landholdings (70–82%).”

One in three natives live in poverty

In summary, the research finds, “these reductions in deforestation frequently occurred without negative socio-economic outcomes.” However, protection agreements related to “Indigenous Territories and Sustainable use protected areas protected against deforestation from mining, but at the cost of smaller improvements in income and inequality.”

In Brazil’s indigenous populations, the study points out, 33% of individuals live below the poverty line. This is a very high figure which is particularly influenced by the lack of social protection and adequate alternative support programmes. For this reason, they explain, the need to protect the forest must be accompanied simultaneously by further initiatives “to ensure these communities are not further disadvantaged.”

Seeking a balance for the Amazon

The protection of survey lands, said Marina Schmoeller, researcher at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and co-author of the research, appears particularly important “for protecting biodiversity.” This issue should not be ignored considering the ongoing legal battles and parlamentary debates that “could potentially limit Indigenous people’s claim for lands not only in the Amazon, but in the whole of the country.”

According to Karl Evans, a researcher at the University of Sheffield and co-author of the survey, the establishment of protected areas and protected territories for indigenous peoples, moreover, would prove “highly effective” in reducing deforestation in the Amazon.

The research, however, adds Johan Oldekop, researcher and co-author from the University of Manchester, , “demonstrates that rights to land and resources for Indigenous people are necessary but perhaps insufficient mechanisms to bridge conservation and development. Therefore, concludes Bowy den Braber, researcher at the University of Sheffield and lead author of the study, “Carefully weighing up the benefits and drawbacks of different land use options can help policymakers maximise progress towards both conservation and development goals.”