No Brasil, aproximadamente 500.000 casos de malária são registrados todo ano, sendo 99% destes na região amazônica que apresenta altas taxas de desmatamento. Até agora era difícil encontrar a ligação entre a propagação de doenças epidêmicas e o desmatamento, pela quantidade e complexidade dos fatores envolvidos, porém, cientistas da Universidade de Wisconsin-Madison completaram sua pesquisa, na qual relacionaram incidências de malária no Acre com imagens de satélite de alta resolução do desmatamento na região.
Os resultados, publicados no artigo "Deforestation and Malaria in Mâncio Lima Country, Brazil" (clique aqui para baixar o artigo) mostram claramente que o aumento nas taxas de desmatamento causam surtos drásticos de malária, possivelmente desencadeando epidemias. A pesquisa encontrou que um aumento de 4% na taxa de desmatamento encontra um aumento de 48% para casos de malária. Em 2006 a área de estudo sofreu, segundo autores, “uma epidemia excepcional”, com pessoas contraindo a doença até quatro vezes por ano.
“A conservação das florestas tropicais pode ser mais benéfica à saúde humana do que se pensava”, aponta Sarah Olson responsável pelo estudo. No caso dessa pesquisa, dados do Ministério do Meio Ambiente que focavam o monitoramento da malária e o mapeamento espacial da saúde nos distritos da Amazônia, ajudaram a provar as associações ecológicas entre os altos índices de malária e de desmatamento: a paisagem desmatada apresenta clareiras e reservatórios de água expostos à luz, que constituem ambiente perfeito para reprodução do vetor transmissor da doença, o mosquito Anopheles Darlingi, também conhecido por deslocar outras espécies de mosquitos que preferem o ambiente florestal e não são propensos a transmitirem a doença.
Olson ressalta que “evidenciar o desmatamento como um risco principal nos mostra que devemos também olhar para o potencial dos fatores socioeconômicos”. Pobreza e demografia também são importantes na análise de distribuição e propagação da malaria. A pesquisa feita por Burton Singer e Marcia Castro aponta que a falta de informação e vulnerabilidade das pessoas que migram para áreas desmatadas aumenta a propensão dos riscos de disseminação da doença apenas iniciados pelo desmatamento. (Patrick Bodenham)
Pagamentos por serviços ambientais (PSA) são capazes de “comprar” mais da metade do desmatamento previsto na Amazônia. Porém as condições institucionais necessárias para um sistema eficiente e equitativo não são adequadas e reduzem este número em 75%.
Além disso, a maior fatia do dinheiro reservado para conservar as florestas iria para os fazendeiros mais ricos da região, que são responsáveis por 80% do desmatamento que ainda está em curso na Amazônia.
Os formuladores de políticas públicas precisam conhecer melhor onde e em quais circunstâncias os PSA contribuem para resultados eficazes e equitativos, conforme um novo relatório intitulado "Pagamentos diretos de conservação na Amazônia brasileira: implicações no escopo e equidade, encomendado pelo Centro Internacional de Pesquisa Florestal (CIFOR).
Várias preocupações têm sido levantadas ao longo dos anos sobre os riscos de um sistema de pagamento que seria mais favorável aos maiores proprietários de terras, especialmente aqueles envolvidos no desmatamento.
Pagar por serviços ambientais só faz sentido quando se trata de áreas de florestas sob direta ameaça de desmatamento. Como os pagamentos de compensação são vinculados à redução do desmatamento, os grandes proprietários, responsáveis por cerca de 80% de todo o desmatamento, receberiam a maior premiação. Os povos indígenas, cujos impactos em suas terras são geralmente pequenos não teriam como receber estes fundos de compensação.
Se você quer parar o desmatamento, então essas pessoas (grandes proprietários) quem precisam receber a maior parte do dinheiro", diz Sven Wunder, cientista do CIFOR no Brasil e autor principal do relatório, que descreve o processo como um "mal necessário" na luta para atingir a desejada redução das emissões.
Os problemas estruturais:
O estudo analisou as tendências e os lucros criados pelo uso da terra e mudanças do uso da terra no arco do desmatamento, considerando que 55% (12,5 milhões de hectares) de todas as florestas ameaçadas produzem um retorno líquido que pode ser compensado por pagamentos, refletidos no preço atual do mercado de carbono.
O que é o PSA:
O programa da ONU sobre a redução das emissões resultantes da desmatamento e degradação florestal (REDD) torna-se cada vez mais dominante no debate ambiental, todos os olhos estão voltados para a Amazônia, que detem a maior floresta tropical do mundo e também tem maior taxa mundial de desmatamento.
Muitos defensores do REDD abraçam a idéia de um sistema de pagamento por serviços ambientais das florestas em pé. O PSA é visto como uma maneira mais eficaz de alcançar os proprietários locais e persuadi-los a preservar suas florestas. Os agricultores são pagos uma mesma quantia ou até mais do que receberia pela conversão de suas florestas para a agricultura, em troca de manter suas florestas intactas.
Uma estrutura como essa oferece incentivos financeiros aos proprietários de terras, ao contrário de ações como “comando e controle" e outras políticas que dependem dos desincentivos, tais como mandatos ambientais contra o desmatamento.
A análise utilizou o valor médio dos créditos de carbono temporário do Chicago Climate Exchange. O principal foco são os criadores de gado de alto impacto e com baixa lucratividade e os pequenos produtores que utilizam queimada para cultivo. Porém, segundo o relatório, esse preço torna impossível remunerar agriculturas mais rentáveis, como o óleo de palma, a soja, a extração de madeira nobre ou mesmo culturas perenes como a pimenta do reino. Mesmo com um preço médio de carbono substancialmente mais elevado, como o oferecido pelo mercado europeu, uma quantidade significativa da terra teria custos de oportunidade maior do que a compensação.
Os regimes de PSA dependem de regularização fundiária e dos direitos legais dos proprietários para permitir ou negar o controle das atividades concorrentes aos ativos que propriedade oferece. Mas como observa o estudo, até 2050, o dois terços do desmatamento está previsto para ocorrer em áreas com precária estrutura fundiária. Outro um quarto de desmatamento futuro é projetado para ocorrer em áreas estritamente protegidas, terras indígenas, áreas de uso sustentável e assentamentos de reforma agrária.
"O governo brasileiro criou esquemas de pagamento por serviços ambientais, porém o pagamento não pode ser usado para deter o desmatamento em terras ilegalmente apropriadas, nem em áreas onde a posse privada é pacífica", diz Jan Börner, cientista do CIFOR e co-autor do relatório. "Caos fundiário representa o maior impedimento para a utilização de pagamentos para implementar o REDD no Brasil em grande escala."
Nos últimos anos há uma tendência mundial de reconhecer os direitos de posse e descentralizar a gestão das florestas às populações locais. Juntas, estas transições tem incentivado a reforma da posse em diversos países e muitas vezes com aumento no armazenamento de carbono e mais dinheiro para as nações em desenvolvimento.
PSA se baseia em medidas de centralização de comando e controle, o risco de não pagamento devido a falhas na gestão das florestas leva os governos centrais a aumentar o controle. CIFOR está atualmente realizando pesquisas para o IBAMA, para ver o quanto eles seriam obrigados a investir para aumentar sua presença em campo e melhorar a proteção sobre a floresta.
Como o financiamento para implementação de projetos de REDD flui através dos órgãos do governo, existem temores de que uma nova forma de governança florestal centralizadora possa prejudicar os direitos das comunidades locais.
Payments for environmental services (PES) are capable of ‘buying out’ more than half of predicted Amazonian deforestation. But the institutional conditions necessary for an efficient and equitable PES system are not adequate, reducing this figure by 75 percent.
Furthermore, the majority of the money set aside to conserve the forests would go to the region’s wealthiest landowners, who are responsible for 80% of deforestation still going on in the Amazon.
Policymakers need to be better informed about where and under which circumstances PES is likely to contribute to effective and equitable outcomes, says a new report entitled ‘Direct conservation payments in the Brazilian Amazon: Scope and equity implications’.
What is PES:
As the UN programme on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) becomes increasingly dominant in the environmental debate, all eyes are turned towards the Amazon, which holds the world’s largest tropical rainforest and is also suffering the world’s fastest rate of deforestation.
Many REDD proponents embrace the idea of a payment system in which forests left standing become a paid-for environmental service. A structure such as this – in comparison with ‘command-and-control’ and other policies used to confront deforestation – is seen as a more effective way of reaching local land users and persuading them to conserve their forests. Farmers are paid the same amount or more than they would make by converting their forests to agriculture, in return for keeping their forests intact.
Structural problems:
A scoping study looked at trends and profits created by land-use and land-use change across the arc of deforestation, finding that 55% (12.5million hectares) of all threatened forests produced net returns that could be compensated for by payments reflecting current carbon market prices.
The analysis used the average value of temporary carbon offsets in the Chicago Climate Exchange. High-impact, low profit cattle ranchers and small-scale landholders who use slash-and-burn farming techniques would be the primary source of focus. At this price, however, the report says it would be impossible buy out more lucrative agriculture such as palm oil, soy beans, land extraction of the high value, or perennial crops like black pepper. Even with an average carbon price substantially higher, such as that offered by the European market, a significant amount of land would have opportunity costs higher than could be compensated for by PES.
PES schemes rely on secure tenure and the legal right of the owners to permit or deny competitors control of the assets the property has to offer. But the study notes how two- thirds of deforestation between now and 2050 is predicted to take place in areas that have poorly defined or insecure tenure. Another quarter of future deforestation is projected to occur in strictly protected areas, indigenous territories, sustainable use areas and land reform settlements.
“The way the Brazilian government has devised payment schemes for environmental services, payment cannot be used to stop deforestation on illegally appropriated lands, nor on lands where private tenure is disputed,’ said Jan Börner, CIFOR scientist and a co-author of the report. ‘Land-tenure chaos represents the single largest impediment for using on-the-ground payments to implement REDD in Brazil on a large scale.’ He added.
Equity issues:
Concerns have been raised for several years regarding the moral hazards of a payment system that would accrue to larger landholders, particularly those who have been involved in deforestation.
PES only makes environmental sense when it addresses areas of forests already under threat from deforestation. As compensation payments are tied to reductions in deforestation, large landowners who are responsible for about 80% of all deforestation would reap the highest awards. Indigenous people, whose impacts on their surroundings are minimal, would have no way of accessing these funds.
“If you want to stop deforestation, then these people need to get a lion’s share of the money” said Sven Wunder, co-author of the report, describing the process as ‘a necessary evil’ in the scramble to achieve desired emissions reductions.
In recent years there has been a worldwide trend towards the recognition of tenure rights, devolving management over forests from governments to local people and communities. Together, these transitions have encouraged tenure reform in many countries and have often been proved to boost carbon storage, while resulting in better incomes in a number of developing nations.
PES relies on centralised command-and-control measures, as the risk of non-payment resulting from local failures in forest management prompts central governments to increase control. CIFOR is currently performing research for IBAMA, the Brazilian Ministry of the Environment’s enforcement agency, to see how much they would need to invest as they step up their field presence to achieve greater forest protection.
As funding for implementing REDD projects flowed through government departments, fears exist that a new, recentralised form of forest governance could undermine local communities’ rights.
Although monitored deforestation rates in the Amazon may be reduced, fires and the associated carbon emissions continue to increase because of cryptic land-use processes.
A satellite analysis of deforestation and forest fires in the Brazilian Amazon has showed that fire occurrences have increased by 59% in areas where deforestation has reportedly slowed. The report attributes these trends to the widespread use of slash-and-burn to clear secondary forest in Amazonia.
Reducing deforestation slows, but does not stop the continuous expansion of the cumulative deforested area. Forest landscapes are also becoming more fragmented, causing an increase in fire susceptibility and exposing it to leakage of accidental fires from adjacent farms.
This leads to a permanent enlargement of forest edges and secondary forest cover. Borders between forests and agriculture are more susceptible to fires lit by farmers who traditionally use fire to manage regrowth on agricultural land.
Burning secondary forest under the canopy allows farmers to plant pasture undetected by PRODES, the satellite system that monitors deforestation rates. This, the report suggests, could offer an explanation of the reverse trend observed between deforestation and fire.
Yet as the process releases huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the land in theory, still counts as forest eligible to generate REDD credits.
The report calls for sustainable, fire-free land management to be adopted in the REDD mechanism, to avoid negating carbon savings achieved by avoided deforestation.
A key objective of good forest governance is to establish effective forest management on the part of social organisations, as it is these organisations that attempt to align economic activities with the interests of a country’s citizens.
As one of a set of five governance principles seen as necessary for governments to design and implement public policies away from a framework of unrest, Transparency stands out as key.
Global Witness, the official NGO observer to the UN-REDD process, recently held a meeting to discuss the results of an annual ‘report card’ on forest transparency, with board members from Cameroon, Ghana, Liberia and Peru.
Over a four month investigation period, public forestry institutions in each country were probed for their openness in communicating information necessary for the full participation of civil society in forest decision-making. Key themes were transparent decision making, legal access to information and forest tenure and land use.
Of all four countries involved, Peru is the only to have an established legal framework that guarantees access to information. As a right recognised in article 2 numeral 5 of the Political Constitution of Peru, transparency is regulated by the Transparency and Access to Public Information Law approved by Law No.27806.
Yet research carried out by the sustainable development organisation Derecho, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (DAR) uncovered a worrying lack of compliance with this law. Laura Furones, Head of Latin American Development at Global Witness said “There is a clear gap between the theory and the practice. Yes, the instruments exist, but the real question is do they work?”
The investigation, which comprised two main approaches - monitoring transparency in relevant websites and submitting letter requests for information - found the average compliance with legal requirements for websites dedicated to transparency in the forest sector by the institutions in charge of management and conservation of forests to be only 49.5%, while in other non-forest-related institutions it reached 82.6%. Only 25% of requests for further information were responded to.
According to Furones, it is difficult to know whether the opacity around forest information is due to a lack of resources or a lack of will. Following the implementation of the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement in February last year, there has certainly been a focus on establishing a legal framework that places a more equal emphasis in the needs of the public sector.
In the shadow of violent confrontation and the death of more than 33 people in Bagua last year, a new law on forests and wildlife is currently being negotiated in the Peruvian Congress. It will separate forest resources into zones in the hopes of preventing disputes related to different economic activities. Within four working groups set up by the government, one looked at forest law and indigenous participation. The obvious ramifications of the bill on forest transparency have made it the focal point of meetings up until now. Suggestions from NGOs and experts closed on April 9th and the bill has been presented to Congress for a vote. Yet interests are polarised, and whether or not suggestions on forest transparency will be successfully incorporated into public policy, or even listened to, is currently point of tension.
Following the dissemination of the project’s actions, the General Directorate of Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre (FFS) under the national Ministerio de Agricultura announced a commitment to implement a webpage specifically dedicated to information sharing for the benefit of forest stakeholders and local actors.
The next forest transparency report card will be carried out again in the final months of 2010, and will continue yearly under the programme ends in three years time.
The programme hopes to incorporate a new country into its research each year and is currently undergoing discussions with Ecuador and Guyana.
The global mechanism to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) threatens to reverse positive forestry reforms in developing countries that were already tackling the problem, a new study finds.
The report - published in the journal Science by Edward Webb and Jacob Phelps - examines how the scheme could soon become too valuable and complex, increasing the likelihood of local communities being excluded.
On a national level, the rush to enter a competitive carbon market would undermine a pre-existing “decentralisation trend” in poorer countries, where cash-strapped governments have been giving local communities and administrations more rights and powers to manage their forests.
Decentralised forest management is seen to have improved forest carbon storage and resulted in better incomes in a number of developing nations. REDD, the report outlines, is performance-based mechanism that would dramatically increase the market value of forests. The risk of non-payment resulting from local failures in forest management would prompt central governments to increase control.
Webb and Phelps say a properly constituted REDD scheme is complex and risks poor outcomes if rushed.
The report appeared days after a joint statement of concern was released (http://bit.ly/dpE4sB) (http://bit.ly/9hAmqO) by 42 environmental organisations, which denounced the Paris-Oslo process for failing to properly consider the interests of local peoples.
The Fourth Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI) Dialogue on Forests, Governance and Climate Change held in London last week, provided a well-timed opportunity to look at the current state of international negotiations on deforestation following COP15.
As a result of the general failure to achieve legal agreement, no binding decision was taken on REDD at COP15. It did however feature strongly in the Copenhagen accord and six countries pledged US$3.5 billion as a ‘fast-start’ interim finance to be paid between 2010 and 2012 when the Kyoto Protocol expires. This year, a number of other countries have announced contributions and the total amount pledged is now considered to be somewhere between 2.5 and 6 billion.
The Paris-Oslo initiative was the first ministerial level meeting on REDD, taking place on 11th March. The initiative aims to use the mandate established by Copenhagen to create a multilateral Interim REDD Partnership to secure coordination, transparency, progress and positive precedents with the available fast start interim funding. A second meeting is scheduled for 27th May in Oslo.
The Paris-Oslo initiative is currently a key dynamic in the global politics of deforestation. The RRI discussions highlighted various tensions associated with the process.
• Paul Watkinson of the French Ministry of Ecology, Environment and Sustainable Development spoke of the need for an operational text to move the process forward. • Per F.I Pharo from the Government of Norway emphasized that trying to establish the perfect mechanism covering everything is over-ambitious and unreasonable in the given timeframe. • A network of 40 civil society and indigenous peoples’ organisations had previously denounced the lack of transparency and participation in the Paris discussions in March: http://www.alertnet.org/db/blogs/64052/2010/03/14-101557-1.htm • Rosalind Reeve from Global Witness, the main NGO observer to REDD, described the Paris meeting as “an appalling start” to the Paris-Oslo process, advocating for more attention to safeguards, and measuring, reporting and verifying (MRV). She said efforts by Norway to improve transparency such as parallel workshops and online conferencing were “not enough”.
Brazil’s climate change plan was mentioned by Dan Nepstad of The Woods Hole Research Centre, who stressed that an interim partnership should aim at REDD+ compliance that is efficient and ensures meaningful participation. Nepstad referred to the example that Brazil’s climate change plan is incompatible with its agricultural agenda.
