1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Environment and Resources
  4. Volume 46, 2021
  5. Article

Annual Review of Environment and Resources

Volume 46, 2021

Forests and Sustainable Development in the Brazilian Amazon: History, Trends, and Future Prospects

Abstract

Ongoing deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon is the outcome of an explicit federal project to occupy, integrate, and “modernize” the region. Although there have been isolated periods of deforestation control, most recently between 2004 and 2012, the overall trajectory of the region since the colonial period has been one of forest loss and degradation. Addressing this challenge is especially urgent in the context of adverse climate-ecology feedbacks and tipping points. Here we describe the trends and outcomes of deforestation and degradation in the Amazon. We then highlight how historical development paradigms and policies have helped to cement the land use activities and structural lock-ins that underpin deforestation and degradation. We emphasize how the grounds for establishing a more sustainable economy in the Amazon were never consolidated, leading to a situation where forest conservation and development remain dependent on external programs—punitive measures against deforestation and fire and public social programs. This situation makes progress toward a forest transition(arresting forest loss and degradation and restoring forest landscapes) highly vulnerable to changes in political leadership, private sector engagement, and global market signals. After summarizing these challenges, we present a suite of measures that collectively could be transformational to helping overcome destructive path dependencies in the region. These include innovations in agricultural management, improved forest governance through landscape approaches, developing a local forest economy, sustainable peri-urbanization, and the empowerment of women and youth. These initiatives must be inclusive and equitable, enabling the participation and empowerment of local communities, particularly indigenous groups who have faced numerous historical injustices and are increasingly under threat by current politics.

Keyword(s): conservation, forest transition, governance, justice, livelihoods, political ecology

[Erratum, Closure]

An erratum has been published for this article:
Erratum: Forests and Sustainable Development in the Brazilian Amazon: History, Trends, and Future Prospects
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-010228
2021-10-18
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/energy/46/1/annurev-environ-012220-010228.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-010228&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1. 
    IBGE (Inst. Bras. Geogr. Estat.) 2020. Estimativas da População Brasilia, Brazil: IBGE
  2. 2. 
    Clement CR, Denevan WM, Heckenberger MJ, Junqueira AB, Neves EG et al. 2015. The domestication of Amazonia before European conquest. Proc. R. Soc. B. 282:181220150813
     [Google Scholar]
  3. 3. 
    FAO (UN Food Agric. Organ.) 2017. Food and Agriculture Organization online statistical service: production and trade statistics. United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4. 
    INPE (Inst. Nac. Pesqui. Espac.) 2020. Projeto PRODES: Monitoramento do desmatamento da floresta Amazônica Brasileira por satélite. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais http://www.obt.inpe.br/OBT/assuntos/programas/amazonia/prodes
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 5. 
    Valentim J, Garrett RD 2015. Promoção do Bem-Estar dos Produtores Familiares com uso de Sistemas de Produção Agropecuários e Florestais de Baixo Carbono no Bioma Amazônia. Caminhos para uma Agricultura Familiar sob Bases Ecológicas: Produzindo com Baixa Emissão de Carbono AA Azevedo, M Campanili, C Pereira 73–98 Bras., Brazil: Ipam
     [Google Scholar]
  6. 6. 
    Bullock EL, Woodcock CE, Souza C, Olofsson P. 2020. Satellite-based estimates reveal widespread forest degradation in the Amazon. Glob. Change Biol. 26:52956–69
     [Google Scholar]
  7. 7. 
    Aragão LEOC, Shimabukuro YE. 2010. The incidence of fire in Amazonian forests with implications for REDD. Science 328:59831275–78
     [Google Scholar]
  8. 8. 
    Berenguer E, Ferreira J, Gardner TA, Aragão LEOC, De Camargo PB et al. 2014. A large-scale field assessment of carbon stocks in human-modified tropical forests. Glob. Change Biol. 20:123713–26
     [Google Scholar]
  9. 9. 
    Barlow J, Lennox GD, Ferreira J, Berenguer E, Lees AC et al. 2016. Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation. Nature 535:7610144–47
     [Google Scholar]
  10. 10. 
    Aragão LEOC, Anderson LO, Fonseca MG, Rosan TM, Vedovato LB et al. 2018. 21st Century drought-related fires counteract the decline of Amazon deforestation carbon emissions. Nat. Commun. 9:536
     [Google Scholar]
  11. 11. 
    Baccini A, Walker W, Carvalho L, Farina M, Sulla-Menashe D, Houghton RA. 2017. Tropical forests are a net carbon source based on aboveground measurements of gain and loss. Science 358:6360230–34
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 12. 
    Brando PM, Soares-Filho B, Rodrigues L, Assunção A, Morton D et al. 2020. The gathering firestorm in southern Amazonia. Sci. Adv. 6:2eaay1632
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 13. 
    Lovejoy TE, Nobre C. 2018. Amazon Tipping Point Washington, DC: Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci.
  14. 14. 
    Vieira ICG. 2019. Land use drives change in Amazonian tree species. Anais Acad. Bras. Ciências 91:Suppl. 3 https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201920190186
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  15. 15. 
    Smith CC, Espírito-Santo FDB, Healey JR, Young PJ, Lennox GD et al. 2020. Secondary forests offset less than 10% of deforestation-mediated carbon emissions in the Brazilian Amazon. Glob. Change Biol. 26:127007–20
     [Google Scholar]
  16. 16. 
    Embrapa (Empresa Bras. Pesqui. Agropecu.), INPE (Inst. Nac. Pesqui. Espac.) 2014. Projeto TerraClass 2014: Mapeamento do uso e cobertura da terra na Amazônia Legal Brasileira [Project TerraClass 2014: mapping of the use and cover of land in the Brazilian Legal Amazon]. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais http://www.inpe.br/cra/projetos_pesquisas/terraclass2014.php
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 17. 
    Lennox GD, Gardner TA, Thomson JR, Ferreira J, Berenguer E et al. 2018. Second rate or a second chance? Assessing biomass and biodiversity recovery in regenerating Amazonian forests. Glob. Change Biol. 24:125680–94
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 18. 
    Hahn MB, Gangnon RE, Barcellos C, Asner GP, Patz JA. 2014. Influence of deforestation, logging, and fire on malaria in the Brazilian Amazon. PLOS ONE 9:1e85725
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 19. 
    Butt EW, Conibear LA, Reddington CL, Darbyshire E, Morgan WT et al. 2020. Large air quality and human health impacts due to Amazon forest and vegetation fires. Environ. Res. Commun. 2:095001
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 20. 
    Human Rights Watch 2020. “O Ar é Insuportável” Os impactos das queimadas associadas ao desmatamento da Amazônia brasileira na saúde [“The Air is Unbearable” The impacts of fires associated with deforestation of the Brazilian Amazon on health] Rep., Hum. Rights Watch New York:
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 21. 
    Cammelli F, Coudel E, de Freitas Navegantes Alves L 2019. Smallholders’ perceptions of fire in the Brazilian Amazon: exploring implications for governance arrangements. Hum. Ecol. 47:4601–12
     [Google Scholar]
  22. 22. 
    Cammelli F, Garrett RD, Parry L, Barlow J. 2020. Fire risk perpetuates poverty and fire use among Amazonian smallholders. Glob. Environ. Change 63:102096
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 23. 
    Ellwanger JH, Kulmann-Leal B, Kaminski VL, Valverde-Villegas JM, Veiga ABGD et al. 2020. Beyond diversity loss and climate change: impacts of Amazon deforestation on infectious diseases and public health. Anais Acad. Bras. Ciências 92:1 https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202020191375
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  24. 24. 
    Tyukavina A, Hansen MC, Potapov PV, Stehman SV, Smith-Rodriguez K et al. 2017. Types and rates of forest disturbance in Brazilian Legal Amazon, 2000–2013. Sci. Adv. 3:4e1601047
     [Google Scholar]
  25. 25. 
    Moutinho P, Guerra R, Azevedo-Ramos C. 2016. Achieving zero deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon: What is missing?. Elem. Sci. Anthr. 4:000125
     [Google Scholar]
  26. 26. 
    MapBiomas 2020. Projeto de Mapeamento Anual da Cobertura e Uso do Solo do Brasil. MapBiomas https://mapbiomas.org/o-projeto
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 27. 
    Dias-Filho MB. 2014. Reclaiming the Brazilian Amazon: The Restoration and Management of Pasture Lands Belém, Brazil: Embrapa East. Amazon
  28. 28. 
    Gil JDB, Garrett RD, Berger T. 2016. Determinants of crop-livestock integration in Brazil: evidence from the household and regional levels. Land Use Policy 59:557–68
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 29. 
    Morton DC, DeFries RS, Shimabukuro YE, Anderson LO, Arai E et al. 2006. Cropland expansion changes deforestation dynamics in the southern Brazilian Amazon. PNAS 103:3914637–41
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 30. 
    Gibbs HK, Rausch L, Munger J, Schelly I, Morton DC et al. 2015. Brazil's Soy Moratorium. Science 347:6220377–78
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 31. 
    Arima EY, Richards PD, Walker R, Caldas MM. 2011. Statistical confirmation of indirect land use change in the Brazilian Amazon. Environ. Res. Lett. 6:024010
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 32. 
    Carrero GC, Fearnside PM, do Valle DR, de Souza Alves C. 2020. Deforestation trajectories on a development frontier in the Brazilian Amazon: 35 years of settlement colonization, policy and economic shifts, and land accumulation. Environ. Manag. 66:966–84
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 33. 
    Bowman MS, Soares-Filho BS, Merry FD, Nepstad DC, Rodrigues HO, Almeida OT. 2012. Persistence of cattle ranching in the Brazilian Amazon: a spatial analysis of the rationale for beef production. Land Use Policy 29:3558–68
     [Google Scholar]
  34. 34. 
    Kalamandeen M, Gloor E, Mitchard E, Quincey D, Ziv G et al. 2018. Pervasive rise of small-scale deforestation in Amazonia. Sci. Rep. 8:11600
     [Google Scholar]
  35. 35. 
    Rajão R, Soares-Filho B, Nunes F, Börner J, Machado L et al. 2020. The rotten apples of Brazil's agribusiness. Science 369:6501246–48
     [Google Scholar]
  36. 36. 
    Ferreira J, Aragão LEOC, Barlow J, Barreto P, Berenguer E et al. 2014. Brazil's environmental leadership at risk. Science 346:6210706–7
     [Google Scholar]
  37. 37. 
    Fearnside PM. 2014. Impacts of Brazil's Madeira River Dams: unlearned lessons for hydroelectric development in Amazonia. Environ. Sci. Policy 38:164–72
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 38. 
    Gauthier C, Lin Z, Peter BG, Moran EF. 2019. Hydroelectric infrastructure and potential groundwater contamination in the Brazilian Amazon: Altamira and the Belo Monte Dam. Prof. Geogr. 71:2292–300
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 39. 
    Fearnside PM. 2006. Dams in the Amazon: Belo Monte and Brazil's hydroelectric development of the Xingu River Basin. Environ. Manag. 38:116
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 40. 
    Bebbington A, Chicchon A, Cuba N, Greenspan E, Hecht S et al. 2020. Opinion: Priorities for governing large-scale infrastructure in the tropics. PNAS 117:3621829–33
     [Google Scholar]
  41. 41. 
    Vilela T, Harb AM, Bruner A, da Silva Arruda VL, Ribeiro V et al. 2020. A better Amazon road network for people and the environment. PNAS 117:137095–102
     [Google Scholar]
  42. 42. 
    Ferrante L, Fearnside PM. 2020. The Amazon's road to deforestation. Science 369:6504634
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 43. 
    Sonter LJ, Herrera D, Barrett DJ, Galford GL, Moran CJ, Soares-Filho BS. 2017. Mining drives extensive deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Nat. Commun. 8:1013
     [Google Scholar]
  44. 44. 
    Siqueira-Gay J, Soares-Filho B, Sanchez LE, Oviedo A, Sonter LJ. 2020. Proposed legislation to mine Brazil's indigenous lands will threaten Amazon forests and their valuable ecosystem services. One Earth 3:3356–62
     [Google Scholar]
  45. 45. 
    Alvarez-Berríos NL, Aide TM 2015. Global demand for gold is another threat for tropical forests. Environ. Res. Lett. 10:1014006
     [Google Scholar]
  46. 46. 
    Gibb H, O'Leary KG 2014. Mercury exposure and health impacts among individuals in the artisanal and small-scale gold mining community: a comprehensive review. Environ. Health Perspect. 122:7667–72
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 47. 
    Villén-Pérez S, Moutinho P, Nóbrega CC, Marco PD. 2020. Brazilian Amazon gold: indigenous land rights under risk. Elem. Sci. Anth. 8:131
     [Google Scholar]
  48. 48. 
    RAISG (Rede Amazôn. Inf. Socioambient. Georref.) 2020. Minería ilegal [Illegal mining]. Rede Amazônica de Informação Socioambiental Georreferenciada https://mineria.amazoniasocioambiental.org/
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49. 
    Matricardi EAT, Skole DL, Costa OB, Pedlowski MA, Samek JH, Miguel EP 2020. Long-term forest degradation surpasses deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 369:65091378–82
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 50. 
    Asner GP, Knapp DE, Broadbent EN, Oliveira PJ, Keller M, Silva JN. 2005. Selective logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 310:5747480–82
     [Google Scholar]
  51. 51. 
    Uhl C, Veríssimo A, Mattos MM, Brandino Z, Guimarães Vieira IC 1991. Social, economic, and ecological consequences of selective logging in an Amazon frontier: the case of Tailândia. For. Ecol. Manag 46:3–4243–73
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 52. 
    Piponiot C, Rödig E, Putz FE, Rutishauser E, Sist P et al. 2019. Can timber provision from Amazonian production forests be sustainable?. Environ. Res. Lett. 14:6064014
     [Google Scholar]
  53. 53. 
    Barlow J, Berenguer E, Carmenta R, França F. 2020. Clarifying Amazonia's burning crisis. Glob. Change Biol. 26:2319–21
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 54. 
    Cano-Crespo A, Oliveira PJC, Boit A, Cardoso M, Thonicke K. 2015. Forest edge burning in the Brazilian Amazon promoted by escaping fires from managed pastures. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 120:102095–107
     [Google Scholar]
  55. 55. 
    Brando PM, Paolucci L, Ummenhofer CC, Ordway EM, Hartmann H et al. 2019. Droughts, wildfires, and forest carbon cycling: a pantropical synthesis. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 47:555–81
     [Google Scholar]
  56. 56. 
    Torres PC, Morsello C, Parry L, Barlow J, Ferreira J et al. 2018. Landscape correlates of bushmeat consumption and hunting in a post-frontier Amazonian region. Environ. Conserv. 45:4315–23
     [Google Scholar]
  57. 57. 
    Peres CA, Barlow J, Laurance WF. 2006. Detecting anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21:5227–29
     [Google Scholar]
  58. 58. 
    Parry L, Barlow J, Peres CA. 2009. Hunting for sustainability in tropical secondary forests. Conserv. Biol. 23:51270–80
     [Google Scholar]
  59. 59. 
    Peres CA, Emilio T, Schietti J, Desmoulière SJ, Levi T. 2016. Dispersal limitation induces long-term biomass collapse in overhunted Amazonian forests. PNAS 113:4892–97
     [Google Scholar]
  60. 60. 
    Soares-Filho BS, Rajão R, Macedo MN, Carneiro A, Costa W et al. 2014. Cracking Brazil's Forest Code. Science 344:6182363–64
     [Google Scholar]
  61. 61. 
    Leal CG, Lennox GD, Ferraz SF, Ferreira J, Gardner TA et al. 2020. Integrated terrestrial-freshwater planning doubles conservation of tropical aquatic species. Science 370:6512117–21
     [Google Scholar]
  62. 62. 
    Leal CG, Barlow J, Gardner TA, Hughes RM, Leitão RP et al. 2018. Is environmental legislation conserving tropical stream faunas? A large-scale assessment of local, riparian and catchment-scale influences on Amazonian fish. J. Appl. Ecol. 55:31312–26
     [Google Scholar]
  63. 63. 
    Mansourian S, Stanturf JA, Derkyi MAA, Engel VL. 2017. Forest landscape restoration: increasing the positive impacts of forest restoration or simply the area under tree cover?. Restor. Ecol. 25:2178–83
     [Google Scholar]
  64. 64. 
    Vieira ICG, Gardner T, Ferreira J, Lees AC, Barlow J. 2014. Challenges of governing second-growth forests: a case study from the Brazilian Amazonian State of Pará. Forests 5:71737–52
     [Google Scholar]
  65. 65. 
    Urzedo DI, Neilson J, Fisher R, Junqueira RG. 2020. A global production network for ecosystem services: the emergent governance of landscape restoration in the Brazilian Amazon. Glob. Environ. Change 61:102059
     [Google Scholar]
  66. 66. 
    Hecht SB, Rajão R. 2020. From “Green Hell” to “Amazonia Legal”: land use models and the re-imagination of the rainforest as a new development frontier. Land Use Policy 96:103871
     [Google Scholar]
  67. 67. 
    INCRA (Inst. Nac. Colon. Reforma Agrár.) 2019. Incra nos Estados: Informações gerais sobre os assentamentos da Reforma Agrária. Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária https://painel.incra.gov.br/sistemas/index.php
    [Google Scholar]
  68. 68. 
    MDA (Minist. Desenvolv. Agrár.) 2014. Acompanhe as ações do MDA/INCRA. Ministerio da Agricultura Familiar e do Desenvolvimento Agrario. Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário. https://painel.incra.gov.br/sistemas/index.php
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 69. 
    Reydon BP, Fernandes VB, Telles TS. 2019. Land governance as a precondition for decreasing deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy 94:104313
     [Google Scholar]
  70. 70. 
    de Area Leão Pereira EJ, de Santana Ribeiro LC, da Silva Freitas LF, de Barros, Pereira HB. 2020. Brazilian policy and agribusiness damage the Amazon rainforest. Land Use Policy 92:104491
     [Google Scholar]
  71. 71. 
    Azevedo-Ramos C, Moutinho P. 2018. No man's land in the Brazilian Amazon: Could undesignated public forests slow Amazon deforestation?. Land Use Policy 73:125–27
     [Google Scholar]
  72. 72. 
    Lipscomb M, Prabakaran N. 2020. Property rights and deforestation: evidence from the Terra Legal land reform in the Brazilian Amazon. World Dev 129:104854
     [Google Scholar]
  73. 73. 
    Mueller B, Mueller C. 2016. The political economy of the Brazilian model of agricultural development: institutions versus sectoral policy. Q. Rev. Econ. Finance 62:12–20
     [Google Scholar]
  74. 74. 
    Valentim JF, Vosti SA 2005. The Western Brazilian Amazon. Slash-and-Burn Agriculture: The Search for Alternatives SA Vosti, PA Sanchez, PJ Ericksen 265–90 New York: Columbia Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  75. 75. 
    Klinger JM. 2015. Rescaling China-Brazil investment relations in the strategic minerals sector. J. Chinese Political Sci. 20:3227–42
     [Google Scholar]
  76. 76. 
    Oliveira G de LT. 2018. Chinese land grabs in Brazil? Sinophobia and foreign investments in Brazilian soybean agribusiness. Globalizations 15:1114–33
     [Google Scholar]
  77. 77. 
    SEI (Stockh. Environ. Inst.) 2020. Trase Yearbook Rep., SEI, Stockh.
  78. 78. 
    Vale P, Gibbs H, Vale R, Christie M, Florence E et al. 2019. The expansion of intensive beef farming to the Brazilian Amazon. Glob. Environ. Change 57:101922
     [Google Scholar]
  79. 79. 
    MMA (Minst. Meio Amb.) 2020. Painel de Unidades de Conservação Brasileiras. Ministerio de Meio Ambiente. https://www.icmbio.gov.br/portal/faunabrasileira/painel-de-conservacao-da-fauna-brasileira
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 80. 
    Fed. Repub. Brasil 2016. Intended Nationally Determined Contribution towards achieving the objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Gov. Doc., UN Framew. Conv. Clim. Change, Bonn, Ger. https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/Brazil%20First/BRAZIL%20iNDC%20english%20FINAL.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  81. 81. 
    Maia H, Hargrave J, Gómez J, Röper M, Fonseca I et al. 2011. Avaliação do Plano de Ação para Prevenção e Controle do Desmatamento na Amazônia Legal (PPCDAm 2007–2010). Rep., Int. Pesqui. Econ. Apl.–Com. Econ. Nações Unidas Am. Lat. Caribe– Deutsche Ges. Int. Zs. Brasilia, Brazil: https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/3046/S33375A9452011_pt.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 82. 
    Soares-Filho B, Moutinho P, Nepstad D, Anderson A, Rodrigues H et al. 2010. Role of Brazilian Amazon protected areas in climate change mitigation. PNAS 107:2410821–26
     [Google Scholar]
  83. 83. 
    Sparovek G, Barretto AG de OP, Matsumoto M, Berndes G. 2015. Effects of governance on availability of land for agriculture and conservation in Brazil. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49:1710285–93
     [Google Scholar]
  84. 84. 
    Assunção J, Gandour C, Rocha R. 2015. Deforestation slowdown in the Brazilian Amazon: prices or policies?. Environ. Dev. Econ. 20:06697–722
     [Google Scholar]
  85. 85. 
    Cammelli F, Angelsen A. 2019. Amazonian farmers’ response to fire policies and climate change. Ecol. Econ. 165:106359
     [Google Scholar]
  86. 86. 
    Chimeli AB, Soares RR. 2017. The use of violence in illegal markets: evidence from mahogany trade in the Brazilian Amazon. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 9:430–57
     [Google Scholar]
  87. 87. 
    Bragagnolo C, Gama GM, Vieira FA, Campos-Silva JV, Bernard E et al. 2019. Hunting in Brazil: What are the options?. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 17:271–79
     [Google Scholar]
  88. 88. 
    Brancalion PH, de Almeida DR, Vidal E, Molin PG, Sontag VE et al. 2018. Fake legal logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Sci. Adv. 4:8eaav3223
     [Google Scholar]
  89. 89. 
    Santos de Lima L, Merry F, Soares-Filho B, Rodrigues HO. 2020. Illegal logging as a disincentive to the establishment of a sustainable forest sector in the Amazon. PLOS ONE 13:12e0207855
     [Google Scholar]
  90. 90. 
    Carvalho WD, Mustin K, Hilário RR, Vasconcelos IM, Eilers V, Fearnside PM. 2019. Deforestation control in the Brazilian Amazon: a conservation struggle being lost as agreements and regulations are subverted and bypassed. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 17:3122–30
     [Google Scholar]
  91. 91. 
    McDermott CL, Irland LC, Pacheco P. 2015. Forest certification and legality initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon: lessons for effective and equitable forest governance. Forest Policy Econ 50:134–42
     [Google Scholar]
  92. 92. 
    zu Ermgassen EK, Ayre B, Godar J, Lima MGB, Bauch S et al. 2020. Using supply chain data to monitor zero deforestation commitments: an assessment of progress in the Brazilian soy sector. Environ. Res. Lett. 15:3035003
     [Google Scholar]
  93. 93. 
    Heilmayr R, Rausch LL, Munger J, Gibbs HK. 2020. Brazil's Amazon Soy Moratorium reduced deforestation. Nature Food 1:12801–10
     [Google Scholar]
  94. 94. 
    Alix-Garcia J, Gibbs HK 2017. Forest conservation effects of Brazil's zero deforestation agreements undermined by leakage. Glob. Environ. Change 47:207–17
     [Google Scholar]
  95. 95. 
    Viana C, Coudel E, Barlow J, Ferreira J, Gardner T, Parry L. 2016. How does hybrid governance emerge? Role of the elite in building a Green Municipality in the Eastern Brazilian Amazon. Env. Pol. Gov. 26:5337–50
     [Google Scholar]
  96. 96. 
    Pokorny B, Johnson J, Medina G, Hoch L. 2012. Market-based conservation of the Amazonian forests: revisiting win-win expectations. Geoforum 43:3387–401
     [Google Scholar]
  97. 97. 
    Alves-Pinto HN, Newton P, Pinto LFG 2015. Reducing deforestation and enhancing sustainability in commodity supply chains: interactions between governance interventions and cattle certification in Brazil. Trop. Conserv. Sci. 8:41053–79
     [Google Scholar]
  98. 98. 
    Schleifer P. 2017. Private regulation and global economic change: the drivers of sustainable agriculture in Brazil. Governance 30:4687–703
     [Google Scholar]
  99. 99. 
    Metzger JP, Bustamante MM, Ferreira J, Fernandes GW, Librán-Embid F et al. 2019. Why Brazil needs its Legal Reserves. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 17:391–103
     [Google Scholar]
  100. 100. 
    de Area Leão Pereira EJ, Silveira Ferreira PJ, de Santana Ribeiro LC, Sabadini Carvalho T, de Barros Pereira HB 2019. Policy in Brazil (2016–2019) threaten conservation of the Amazon rainforest. Environ. Sci. Policy 100:8–12
     [Google Scholar]
  101. 101. 
    Tollefson J. 2018. Brazil's presidential election could savage its science. Nature 562:7726171–73
     [Google Scholar]
  102. 102. 
    Abessa D, Famá A, Buruaem L. 2019. The systematic dismantling of Brazilian environmental laws risks losses on all fronts. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3:4510–11
     [Google Scholar]
  103. 103. 
    Fearnside PM. 2019. Retrocessos sob o Presidente Bolsonaro: Um Desafio à Sustentabilidade na Amazônia (Setbacks under President Bolsonaro: A Challenge to Sustainability in the Amazon). Sustentabilidade Int. Sci. J. 1:138–52
     [Google Scholar]
  104. 104. 
    Araújo R, Vieira ICG 2019. Desmatamento e as ideologias da expansão da fronteira agrícola: o caso das críticas ao sistema de monitoramento da floresta amazônica (Deforestation and the ideologies of the frontier expansion: the case of criticism of the Brazilian Amazon monitoring program). Sustain. Debate 10:3366–78
     [Google Scholar]
  105. 105. 
    Acebes CM. 2019. Rainforest Mafias: How Violence and Impunity Fuel Deforestation in Brazil's Amazon New York: Human Rights Watch
  106. 106. 
    Viola E, Gonçalves VK. 2019. Brazil ups and downs in global environmental governance in the 21st century. Rev. Bras. Polít. Int. 62:2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201900210
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  107. 107. 
    Amaral AC, Watanabe P, Yukari D, Meneghini M. 2020. Governo acelerou canetadas sobre meio ambiente durante a pandemia. Folha de São Paulo July 28
    [Google Scholar]
  108. 108. 
    Garrett R, Cammelli F. 2020. How politics of misdirection fuel coronavirus and Amazon fires. Globe Post June 12. https://theglobepost.com/2020/06/12/coronavirus-amazon-fires/
    [Google Scholar]
  109. 109. 
    Lehmann J, Kern DC, Glaser B, Woods WI 2007. Amazonian Dark Earths: Origin Properties Management Berlin: Springer Sci. Bus. Media
  110. 110. 
    Sills EO, Caviglia-Harris JL. 2009. Evolution of the Amazonian frontier: land values in Rondônia, Brazil. Land Use Policy 26:155–67
     [Google Scholar]
  111. 111. 
    Seixas MA. 2020. A Eclosão do coronavírus na China - O alastramento da peste suína africana na Ásia e o acordo comercial EUA-CHINA - riscos e oportunidades para o agronegócio brasileiro. Rep. NT31, Sér. Diálogo. Estratég. Embrapa Brasilia, Brazil:
     [Google Scholar]
  112. 112. 
    Padoch C, Brondizio E, Costa S, Pinedo-Vasquez M, Sears R, Siqueira A. 2008. Urban forest and rural cities: multi-sited households, consumption patterns, and forest resources in Amazonia. Ecol. Soc. 13:22
     [Google Scholar]
  113. 113. 
    IBGE (Inst. Bras. Geogr. Estat. 2020. Produção Agrícola Municipal—PAM. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/economicas/agricultura-e-pecuaria/9117-producao-agricola-municipal-culturas-temporarias-e-permanentes.html?=&t=o-que-e
    [Google Scholar]
  114. 114. 
    Yamada M, Osaqui HML 2006. The role of homegardens in agroforestry development: lessons from Tomé-Açu, a Japanese-Brazilian settlement in the Amazon. Tropical Homegardens: A Time-Tested Example of Sustainable Agroforestry BM Kumar, PKR Nair 299–316 Dordrecht, Neth: Springer
     [Google Scholar]
  115. 115. 
    de Assis Costa F. 2016. Contributions of fallow lands in the Brazilian Amazon to CO2 balance, deforestation and the agrarian economy: inequalities among competing land use trajectories. Elem. Sci. Anth. 4:000133
     [Google Scholar]
  116. 116. 
    Brumer A. 2008. Gender relations in family-farm agriculture and rural-urban migration in Brazil. Latin Am. Perspect. 35:611–28
     [Google Scholar]
  117. 117. 
    Barbieri AF, Monte-Mór RL, Bilsborrow RE 2009. Towns in the jungle: exploring linkages between rural-urban mobility, urbanization and development in the Amazon. Urban Population-Environment Dynamics in the Developing World: Case Studies and Lessons Learned A de Sherbinin, A Rahman, AF Barbieri, J-C Fotso, Y Zhu 247–79 Paris: Comm. Int. Coop. Natl. Res. Demogr.
     [Google Scholar]
  118. 118. 
    Lobão MSP, Staduto JAR. 2019. O RURAL E O URBANO NA AMAZÔNIA BRASILEIRA1: UM ESTUDO A PARTIR DA ABORDAGEM TERRITORIAL. Boletim Geografia 37:2 https://doi.org/10.4025/bolgeogr.v37i2.41229
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  119. 119. 
    MDR (Minist. Desenvolv. Reg.) 2018. Sistema Nacional de Informações sobre Saneamento 2018: Região Norte. Ministério do Desenvolvimento Regional http://snis.gov.br/painel-informacoes-saneamento-brasil/web/
    [Google Scholar]
  120. 120. 
    Cunha MP, Marques RC, Dórea JG. 2018. Child nutritional status in the changing socioeconomic region of the northern Amazon, Brazil. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15:115
     [Google Scholar]
  121. 121. 
    da Costa SMG. 2016. Sojicultura e mercado de terras na amazônia. Rev. Políticas Públicas 19:1173–85
     [Google Scholar]
  122. 122. 
    Mello D, Schmink M. 2017. Amazon entrepreneurs: women's economic empowerment and the potential for more sustainable land use practices. Women's Stud. Int. Forum 65:28–36
     [Google Scholar]
  123. 123. 
    Randell H. 2016. The short-term impacts of development-induced displacement on wealth and subjective well-being in the Brazilian Amazon. World Dev 87:385–400
     [Google Scholar]
  124. 124. 
    Slinger VAV. 2000. Peri-urban agroforestry in the Brazilian Amazon. Geogr. Rev. 90:2177–90
     [Google Scholar]
  125. 125. 
    Tregidgo DJ, Barlow J, Pompeu PS, de Almeida Rocha M, Parry L. 2017. Rainforest metropolis casts 1,000-km defaunation shadow. PNAS 114:328655–59
     [Google Scholar]
  126. 126. 
    Dou Y, Deadman P, Robinson D, Almeida O, Rivero S et al. 2017. Impacts of cash transfer programs on rural livelihoods: a case study in the Brazilian Amazon estuary. Hum. Ecol. 45:5697–710
     [Google Scholar]
  127. 127. 
    Glewwe P, Kassouf AL. 2012. The impact of the Bolsa Escola/Familia conditional cash transfer program on enrollment, dropout rates and grade promotion in Brazil. J. Dev. Econ. 97:2505–17
     [Google Scholar]
  128. 128. 
    Resque AGL, Coudel E, Piketty M-G, Cialdella N, Sá T et al. 2019. Agrobiodiversity and public food procurement programs in Brazil: influence of local stakeholders in configuring green mediated markets. Sustainability 11:51425
     [Google Scholar]
  129. 129. 
    Strassburg BBN, Latawiec AE, Barioni LG, Nobre CA, da Silva VP et al. 2014. When enough should be enough: Improving the use of current agricultural lands could meet production demands and spare natural habitats in Brazil. Glob. Environ. Change 28:84–97
     [Google Scholar]
  130. 130. 
    Zu Ermgassen EKHJ, Pereira de Alcântara M, Balmford A, Barioni L, Neto FB et al. 2018. Results from on-the-ground efforts to promote sustainable cattle ranching in the Brazilian Amazon. Sustainability 10:41301
     [Google Scholar]
  131. 131. 
    Valentim J, de Andrade CMS. 2004. Perspectives of grass-legume pastures for sustainable animal production in the tropics. Reunião Annu. Soc. Bras. Zootecnia 40:142–54
     [Google Scholar]
  132. 132. 
    Gil JDB, Garrett R, Rotz A, Daiogloud V, Valentim J et al. 2018. Tradeoffs in the quest for climate smart agricultural intensification in Mato Grosso, Brazil. Environ. Res. Lett. 13:6064025
     [Google Scholar]
  133. 133. 
    Garrett RD, Koh I, Lambin EF, le Polain de Waroux Y, Kastens JH, Brown JC. 2018. Intensification in agriculture-forest frontiers: land use responses to development and conservation policies in Brazil. Glob. Environ. Change 53:233–43
     [Google Scholar]
  134. 134. 
    Villoria N. 2019. Consequences of agricultural total factor productivity growth for the sustainability of global farming: accounting for direct and indirect land use effects. Environ. Res. Lett. 14:12125002
     [Google Scholar]
  135. 135. 
    Reed J, Ickowitz A, Chervier C, Djoudi H, Moombe K et al. 2020. Integrated landscape approaches in the tropics: a brief stock-take. Land Use Policy 99:104822
     [Google Scholar]
  136. 136. 
    Sills EO, Atmadja SS, de Sassi C, Duchelle AE, Kweka DL et al. 2014. REDD+ on the Ground: A Case Book of Subnational Initiatives Across the Globe. Jawa Barat, Indones.: Cent. Int. For. Res.
     [Google Scholar]
  137. 137. 
    Milhorance C, Bursztyn M. 2018. Emerging hybrid governance to foster low-emission rural development in the amazon frontier. Land Use Policy 75:11–20
     [Google Scholar]
  138. 138. 
    Boyd W, Stickler C, Duchelle AE, Seymour F, Nepstad D et al. 2018. Jurisdictional approaches to REDD+ and low emissions development: progress and prospects Work. Pap., World Resour. Inst. Washington, DC.: https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/ending-tropical-deforestation-jurisdictional-approaches-redd.pdf
  139. 139. 
    IBGE (Inst. Bras. Geogr. Estat.) 2018. Produção da extração vegetal e da silvicultura. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. . https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/pesquisa/pevs/quadros/brasil/2019
  140. 140. 
    Oliberal.com. 2020. Natura reforça compromisso com a região amazônica durante pandemia. . Oliberal.com, May 26
  141. 141. 
    Leonel M. 2000. Bio-sociodiversidade: preservação e mercado. Estud. Avanç. 14:38321–46
     [Google Scholar]
  142. 142. 
    Macdonald T, Winklerprins AM. 2014. Searching for a better life: peri-urban migration in Western Para State, Brazil. Geogr. Rev. 104:3294–309
     [Google Scholar]
  143. 143. 
    Garrett RD, Gardner T, Fonseca T, Marchand S, Barlow J et al. 2017. Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon. Ecol. Soc. 22:327
     [Google Scholar]
  144. 144. 
    Parry L, Day B, Amaral S, Peres CA. 2010. Drivers of rural exodus from Amazonian headwaters. Popul. Environ. 32:2137–76
     [Google Scholar]
  145. 145. 
    Maciel RCG, Cavalcante Filho PG, Júnior FBL, Souza EF 2018. Distribuição de renda na Amazônia: um estudo dos polos agroflorestais em Rio Branco, AC/Distribution of income in the Amazon: a study of the agroflorestais poles in Rio Branco-AC. DRd-Desenvolv. Reg. Debate 8:2108–42
     [Google Scholar]
  146. 146. 
    Schmink M, Gómez-García MA. 2015. Under the canopy: gender and forests in Amazonia. Occas. Pap. 121: Cent. Int. For. Res. Jawa Barat, Indones: https://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-121.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  147. 147. 
    Murrieta RSS, WinklerPrins AM. 2003. Flowers of water: homegardens and gender roles in a riverine caboclo community in the lower Amazon, Brazil. Cult. Agric. 25:135–47
     [Google Scholar]
  148. 148. 
    Zanotti L. 2016. Radical Territories in the Brazilian Amazon: The Kayapó’s Fight for Just Livelihoods Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press
  149. 149. 
    Athayde S, Silva-Lugo J, Schmink M, Heckenberger M. 2017. The same, but different: indigenous knowledge retention, erosion, and innovation in the Brazilian Amazon. Hum. Ecol. 45:4533–44
     [Google Scholar]
  150. 150. 
    Baqui P, Bica I, Marra V, Ercole A, van der Schaar M. 2020. Ethnic and regional variations in hospital mortality from COVID-19 in Brazil: a cross-sectional observational study. Lancet 8:8e1018–26
     [Google Scholar]
  151. 151. 
    Arias ME, Farinosi F, Lee E, Livino A, Briscoe J, Moorcroft PR. 2020. Impacts of climate change and deforestation on hydropower planning in the Brazilian Amazon. Nat. Sustain. 3:430–36
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-010228
Loading
Forests and Sustainable Development in the Brazilian Amazon: History, Trends, and Future Prospects
Annual Review of Environment and Resources 46, 625 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-010228
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-010228
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-010228
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error