Brazil’s Environmental Downturn: A Tale of Many Cattle
Daniel Longhi Guimarães 
• Bookmarks: 139
On September 28, Brazil’s National Environment Council (CONAMA), led by the Environment Minister Ricardo Salles, abolished Resolutions 302 and 303/2002. It established mangrove fields as Areas of Permanent Protection (APP). CONAMA will likely make a similar decision regarding the Pantanal, the world’s largest tropical wetland area located in southwest Brazil. These directives, which severely threaten two of the country’s most diverse biomes, are a major cause for concern.
Until quite recently, Brazil was highly regarded for its sustainable development policies. During Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s presidency (2003 – 2010), Brazil saw a significant increase in progressive environmental regulations, especially with Marina Silva as Environment Minister. Silva, who was raised in extreme deprivation in the impoverished state of Acre, built her political career on preservation causes and was elected in 1994, the youngest senator in the country’s history. She put forward several pieces of environmental protection legislation, including the much-lauded “Sustainable Amazon Plan” (PAS), which brought together sustainability, economic progress, and the protection and inclusion of indigenous people. As a result, the country saw a significant reduction of deforestation and forest burnings, among other positive outcomes. Moreover, Brazil raised its profile by leading environmental discussions in the international arena.
The current minister could not present a starker contrast. Ricardo Salles is a former lawyer who was picked by Jair Bolsonaro due to his support from the farming industry. Even before taking office, he asserted that climate change would not be his office’s primary concern. Instead, he chose to focus on economic development, which gained him immediate praise from his backers. Other aspects of his biography are both sinister and whimsical. He claimed he had a Master’s degree in Law from Yale University until several media outlets contacted the institution, while conducting a background check, only to hear it had never had such an alumnus. His former party, the “New,” expelled him supposedly for accepting the position of minister. When confronted about the expulsion, he asserted: “Between [New Party President] Amoedo and Bolsonaro, I stick with Bolsonaro.”
An annual study by MapBiomas—a coalition of NGOs, universities, and technology companies—showed a significant rise in deforestation during Salles’ tenure. Deforestation in 2019 alone was eight times larger than the city of São Paulo, the Brazilian megalopolis of nearly 20 million inhabitants. There is no shortage of disheartening ways to present the findings. For example, the study also asserts that “in 2019, an average 3,339 ha per day or 139 ha per hour were deforested in Brazil” (De Azevedo et al. 2019, 18). For reference, that is roughly the size of 312 football fields deforested every hour. The rate of deforestation in Brazil is at its highest levels in over a decade—a fact Bolsonaro has tried to dispute. After repeatedly—and baselessly—discrediting similar findings by the Institute for Applied Economic Research (IPEA), he requested that Ricardo Galvão, a physicist and the head of the institute, be dismissed.
What stands out regarding the government’s actions is that it is hard to pinpoint one individual step that caused this unprecedented setback in Brazil’s forest protection. Instead, the damage results from a series of resolutions and other minor executive acts that, steady and sure, dismantle the fabric of the country’s environment preservation rules. The dismissal of Galvão is one among many that could be listed.
When confronted by the media, NGOs, and foreign leaders, Bolsonaro and his associates dismissed the accusations as either “fake news” or attacks against the country’s sovereignty. Bolsonaro stated in last year’s United Nations General Assembly that Brazil was the “victim of an environmental smear.” However, it is undeniable that his government’s ignorance about climate change and preservation undermines Brazil’s international influence. For example, in 2019, Germany and Norway suspended their aid to the Amazon Fund, which had earned Brazil more than half a billion dollars since 2008. Perhaps even more damaging to Brazil’s interests, the EU-Mercosur Trade Deal can fall apart after France asserted it might not ratify the agreement if Brazil did not improve its environmental stance.
There has been some institutional response to the government’s offense. Political parties, including Marina Silva’s Rede, have filed lawsuits against Salles’ revocation of Resolutions 302 and 303/2002. Recently, Brazil’s Supreme Court suspended the governmental act. The injunction, however, is temporary. The main litigation is still ongoing.
So far, Bolsonaro shows no signs of remedying his ways. Just last month, the Pantanal wetland lost roughly a third of its area due to forest fires—10 times the total area lost during the previous 18 years. Salles, very much in character, disbanded the fire brigade squad appointed to the location, pleading lack of funds. It is clear that CONAMA’s recent dismantling of Resolutions 302 and 303/2002, far from an anomaly, is another step down to a potentially irreversible path. But perhaps the aptest description of this process was put forth by Salles in a leaked ministerial meeting that took place on April 22, 2020. Suggesting that the administration should take advantage of the public focus on the COVID-19 pandemic to dismantle environment regulations even further, the minister stated something that could roughly be translated as: “If a single cow crosses the gate, the whole herd may follow through.”
De Azevedo, Tasso, et al. 2020. “Annual Deforestation Report of Brazil 2019.” MapBiomass. https://s3.amazonaws.com/alerta.mapbiomas.org/relatrios/MBI-deforestation-report-2019-en-final5.pdf.
