WikiHome

The Brazilian Amazon

A. Veríssimo and M. Lentini
Amazon Institute for the People and the Environment (Imazon)

Overview

The Brazilian Amazon covers about  5 million km² (59% of Brazil) comprises the states of the northern region (Acre, Amazonas, Amapá, Pará, Rondônia, Roraima and Tocantins) as well Mato Grosso (center-west region) and part of Maranhão (west of 44⁰ W)  (northeast region)  (IBGE, 1997).  (see Figure 1).  (Click on the attachment below to see the figures.) In 2004, the region is still sparsely populated by 22,5 million inhabitants (less than 4.5 inhabitants per km²) - concentrated mainly (70%) in the urban areas.  .  In 2002, the average Human Development Index (HDI) of the Brazilian Amazon was 0.705(the Brazilian average is 0.83).  In 2004, the Brazilian Amazon GDP, equivalent to US$ 64,7billion, represented only 8% of the national GDP (IPEA, 2007).  The economy of the region is dependent on forestry, agriculture, cattle ranching, mining (specially, iron and bauxite), and the duty free industrial zone in Manaus (Lentini et al. 2004).     

Forests and Deforestation

According to the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005 (FAO, 2005), Brazil has today the second largest forest area in the world (478 million hectares).  At least 60% of these forests, or 300 million hectares, are located in the Brazilian Amazon (IBGE, 1997).  However, at the same time, the Brazilian Amazon still has one of the largest deforestation rates in the planet ranging from 2.6 million hectares in 2004 to 1.3 million hectares in 2006 accordingly to the Brazilian Spatial Agency (INPE, 2007).  By 2006 at least 17% of the Brazilian Amazon was already deforested, mainly for the establishment of agricultural commodities and extensive low-productivity cattle ranching.  In addition,there are million of hectares of forest  impoverished by predatory logging and fire (Nepstad et al., 1999; Asner et al., 2005).  In 2003, Barreto et al. (2006) estimated that approximately half of the Brazilian Amazon biome was under some type of human pressure, such as urban centers, deforestation, human settlements or forest fires.  

Table 1 shows the forest types and the vegetation cover in the Brazilian Amazon in 2006.  Forest areas cover about 59%  (mainly dense forests) while non-forest vegetation (savannas, grasslands) account for  24%, and 17% were deforested areas.

Table 1. Forest types and vegetation cover in the Brazilian Amazon in 2006¹.

 

 

¹ Extracted from Lentini et al. (2004). Original data sources are INPE (2006), , IBGE (1997), and IBGE (1991).

Dense forests are characterized by the occurrence of very tall trees (25-35 m), close canopy and scarce understory (Veríssimo et al., 2002).  Research studies in Tailândia region (Eastern Brazilian Amazon) have shown an average basal area of 25 m² ha^-1 in this type of forest (Uhl et al., 1991).  Similar studies conducted in Paragominas (State of Pará) have shown average basal area around 30 m² ha^-1 (Uhl and Vieira, 1989).  On the other hand, open evergreen forests present smaller trees and open canopy.  The mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla King.), the most economic valuable timber species in the planet, is one of the typical species in this type of forest, located mainly in the south of the State of Pará, northwestern Mato Grosso, Rondônia and Acre (Veríssimo et al., 2002).  Veríssimo et al. (1995) estimated the average basal area in open forests around 13.5 m² ha^-1.

Estuarine forests occur in areas affected by river tides in the Amazonian estuary – mainly in the States of Pará and Amapá – and low Amazonas River.  Such forests generally present lower economic value for logging compared to the dense upland evergreen forests (Veríssimo et al., 2002).  In fact, only 10% of the timber species logged in the Brazilian Amazon are endemic to estuarine forests (Martini et al., 1994).  Finally, seasonal and transitional forests occur in the transition zones between dense and open forests and the cerrado ecosystems, mainly in the central portion of Mato Grosso State. 

Land Tenure and Protected Areas in the Brazilian Amazon

In 2006, approximately 42% of the Brazilian Amazon (2.1 million km²) was legally protected, in the forms of Indigenous Lands (21%) and Conservation Units (21%) (Celentano and Veríssimo, 2007; Ribeiro et al., unpublished).  Conservation units include areas for full protection where only tourism is allowed (Parks) or in extreme cases just scientific studies (Biological Reserves and Ecological Station (IUCN Category I) as well sustainable uses reserves such as National Forest, Extractive Reserves and Sustainable Development Reserves (Figure 2).   

Another 9% of the Brazilian Amazon is considered special areas including  Land Reform Settlements , Afro-Brazilian Lands (quilombola) and Military.  According to IBGE (1996), at least  24% more of the Brazilian Amazon is formed by private landholdings.  The remaining 25% of the Brazilian Amazon is formed by unclaimed public lands.  These areas were not yet fully inventoried by the government and, frequently, they have been encroached and used in illegal activities, as predatory logging and deforestation for the establishment of extensive ranching or land speculation.  However, some of these lands are been used by traditional communities with legal rights over their use, a fact that also generates several rural conflicts among these communities and large landholders trying to encroach these lands.

The recent enactment of the Management of Public Forests Law (Federal Law 11,284/2006) provided a new perspective to control public lands and to recognize the rights of forest traditional dwellers in these forests.  This Law also established the first directives for timber concessions in public forests. 

Forest-based Economic Activities in the Brazilian Amazon

According to FAO data (FAO 2007), in 2005 the Brazilian Amazon was the second largest producer of tropical timber in the world, after Indonesia, which roundwood production was estimated in 32.5 million m³ in that year.  In fact, selective logging in natural forests is the third most important economic activity in the Brazilian Amazon (IPEA, 2002; IBGE, 2004), after industrial mining and cattle ranching. Other forest uses as non-timber forest products (NTFPs) production have increased in the last years, mainly for products as Brazil nuts (Bertholletia excelsa) and açaí (Euterpe oleraceae), but are still incipient compared to the economic value of the tropical timber production (Table 2).  At the same time, the Brazilian Amazon still has an small  area of planted forests (roughly 56,000 ha, the equivalent to less than 10% of the Brazilian total), mainly (60%) destined to pulpwood production (IBGE, 2007). 

Table 2. Comparison among the gross revenues generated by logging in the Brazilian Amazon and other forest-based economic activities.

 

¹ Including fibers, palm heart, gums and resins and vegetable oils (IBGE, 2007).

Past research has identified that tropical timber firms tend to be concentrated in inland urban centers named as logging centers, mainly due to the local availability of infra-structure (mainly roads), commerce and specialized services, electrical power, and large availability of labor (Stone, 1997; Uhl et al., 1997; Stone, 1998; Veríssimo et al., 2002; Lentini et al., 2004).  The Imazon carried out in 2004 a wide survey in the 82 logging centers of the Brazilian Amazon.  The main results of this survey can be accessed in Lentini et al. (2005), and are summarized below.   

In 2004, the 3,130 firms located in the 82 logging centers of the Brazilian Amazon generated gross revenue of US$ 2.3 billion. In this year, the Amazonian timber sector consumed 24.5 million m³ of logwood to produce 10.4 million m³ of processed timber (sawn-wood, veneers, plywood and finished wood products), which implies in an average efficiency of 42% in the production. Almost half of logwood wastes in wood production are simply burned without any economic use, creating environmental and human health problems in the inland cities where these mills area located.  More than 90% of the Amazonian production was concentrated in the States of Pará, Mato Grosso and Rondônia.  The timber industry generated in this year approximately 380,000 jobs, including 124,000 direct jobs (processing and logging) and 255,000 indirect jobs. These jobs represent approximately 3% of the Amazonian economically active population (IPEA, 2002; Lentini et al., 2005).

Brief History of Logging in the Brazilian Amazon.--Selective logging has occurred in the Amazonian estuary since the 17^th century (Rankin, 1985).  For the first two centuries, logging was restricted to várzea forests along the main Amazonian rivers, harvesting high value species for European markets (Barros and Uhl, 1995; Zarin et al., 2001).  In the 1960s and 1970s, intensive government investments opened access to extensive portions of inland upland forests mainly through the construction of roads.  Such investments allowed the development of extensive and highly predatory logging in upland forests, fueled by government subsidies for individuals to inhabit the region, the depletion of hardwood species in southern Brazil, and the large availability of unclaimed lands in the Brazilian Amazon (Uhl et al., 1997; Stone, 1998; Veríssimo et al., 1998; Veríssimo et al., 2002).

The first areas explored during the road construction period supplied older logging frontiers located today in the old logging frontiers (Figure 3), such as Paragominas and Sinop (Lentini et al., 2004).  Timber stocks in older frontiers have been largely depleted after three decades of unplanned and predatory logging and conversion of forests to agricultural use.  A part of the firms in these frontiers are gradually moving to newer frontiers.  In 2004, 26 logging centers were located within intermediate frontiers, representing ¼ of the timber production, revenues and jobs generated by the Amazonian logging industry.  Then, as consequence of timber firm migration, large availability of high value timber, and forest clearings for more intensive cattle ranching and agriculture, timber production within new frontiers, such as Novo Progresso (Pará State), increased by more than 80% in the past 8 years (Lentini et al., 2005) (Figure 3).

Markets for Amazonian Tropical Wood.--Historically, the timber production increased in the Amazon as a consequence of the exhaustion of the timber stocks from natural forests mainly in south-southern Brazil and also the increasing restrictions to harvest Atlantic forests in these regions. Most of the production generated in the Amazon is therefore destined to supply a domestic market interested in cheap materials for civil construction. In 2002, Sobral et al. (2002) showed that two thirds of the Amazonian wood consumed in São Paulo State – the main individual consumer of Amazonian wood products in the world – were destined for low value added uses in civil construction as structures in roofing or forms for concrete structures. This fact collaborates for the low interest from domestic markets in incentive the purchase of wood products generated through sound forest practices, such as forest certification (Veríssimo et al., 2005).

However, on the other hand, the Amazonian participation in international tropical timber markets is likely to increase in the future because of the exhaustion of natural timber stocks in Malaysia and Indonesia (Uhl et al., 1997; Vincent, 1997). In fact, the proportion of exported wood from Amazon increased from 14% of the total production in 1998 (1.6 million m³) to 36% in 2004 (3.7 million m³) (Figure 4) (Veríssimo and Smeraldi, 1999; Lentini et al., 2004; Lentini et al., 2005). Not only the quantity but also the quality of the wood products exported by Amazon changed in the last years. According to the Brazilian Ministry of Overseas Commerce (MDIC, 2007), the value of the wood products exported from Amazon increased from US$ 381 million in 1998 to US$ 1 billion in 2006, in which the participation of finished wood products (as furniture, flooring or other value added wood parts) increased from 3% of the total value in 1998 (US$ 12.5 million) to 32% (US$ 324.6 million) in 2004 (Figure 4). 

 

Perspectives and Challenges in the Amazonian Forest Sector

Despite its strategic socio-economic importance, most of the timber production in the Brazilian Amazon is generated today through predatory forest practices, without using RIL (reduced impact logging) practices.  RIL involves a careful planning of the forest operations and the use of specific practices to mitigate environmental impacts from harvesting.  Using these techniques, managed logged forests can better recover due to the occurrence of less damage and less openings in the canopy during harvesting (Amaral et al., 1998). 

At least 50% of the timber production in the Brazilian Amazon in 2004 was carried out illegally, or without licensing procedures executed by environmental agencies.  Moreover, field assessments showed, a few years ago, that forest management plans licensed by such agencies frequently were not using the adequate techniques during harvesting (Silva, 1997; Sabogal et al., 2006).  It is very likely that only forest management operations certified by the FSC are following the correct implementation of such practices.  In 2006, these areas totaled 2.8 million hectares (FSC, 2007), which could supply less than 3% of the roundwood demand from timber firms in the Brazilian Amazon.      

At  the root of this problem, there is the chaotic Amazonian land tenure.  An important step to address this problem was the enactment of the Management of Public Forests Law.  If well implemented, this new policy can provide the geographical stabilization of the logging frontiers through the establishment of concessions and secure use rights to traditional communities dwelling in public forests.  Other important improvements have been carried out by government and organized civil society in relation to enforcement of illegal activities and licensing systems. 

However, to be successful, this overarching strategy has great challenges.  First, State agencies have to build institutional capacity in a way to decentralize the roles of the federal agencies.  Second, to promote the increase in the managed forest area for timber production, government has to invest in training and financial support, and also decrease policy incentives for  timber production from deforestation.  Third, increased transparency is needed in the forest sector, enhancing enforcement and licensing systems, halting corruption and bribery, and guaranteeing that auctions for concessions will be carried out in a competitive and independent way. Fourth, investments and technical assistance are needed to foment forest activities in traditional communities,  to provide incentives for the production of timber and NTFPs and helping to enhance the quality of living of inland Amazonian forest dwellers.

 

References

 Amaral, P., Veríssimo, A., Barreto, P., Vidal, E., 1998. Floresta para sempre: um manual para a produção de madeira na Amazônia. Imazon, WWF and USAID, Belém (Brazil).

Asner, G.P., Knapp, D.E., Broadbent, E.N., Oliveira, P.J.C., Keller, M., Silva, J.N., 2005. Selective logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 310, 480-482.

Barreto, P., Amaral, P., Vidal, E., Uhl, C., 1998. Costs and benefits of forest management for timber production in eastern Amazonia. Forest Ecology and Management 108, 9-26.

Barreto, P., Souza Jr., C., Noguerón, R., Anderson, A., Salomão, R., 2006. Human pressure in the Brazilian Amazon forests. World Resources Institute, Imazon and Global Forest Watch. WRI Report.
 
Barros, A.C., Uhl, C., 1995. Logging along the Amazon River and estuary - patterns, problems and potential. Forest Ecology and Management 77, 87-105.

Celentano, D., Veríssimo, A., 2007. A Amazônia e os objetivos do milênio. O Estado da Amazônia: Indicadores. Imazon, Belém (Brazil).

FAO. 2007. Faostat Forestry Data 2007. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://faostat.fao.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=381&lang=en. Accessed July 10, 2007 .

 FAO. 2005. Global Forest Resorces Assessment 2005. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy.

FSC Brasil. 2007. Forest certified by the FSC in Brazil. Brazilian Forest Management Council. http://www.fsc.org.br. Accessed July 13, 2007.

Holmes, T., Blate, G., Zweede, J., Pereira, R., Barreto, P., Boltz, F., Bauch, R., 2000. Financial Costs and Benefits of Reduced-Impact Logging Relative to Conventional Logging in the Eastern Amazon.  USDA Forest Service, TFF, IFT, Imazon and SFRC.

 IBAMA. 2006. List of the Federal Conservation Units in the Brazilian Amazon.  Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Natural Renewable Resources. http://www2.ibama.gov.br/unidades/geralucs/tabl.htm. Accessed April 13, 2006.

 IBGE. 1991. Geografia do Brasil: Região Norte. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil).

IBGE. 1996. Censo Agropecuário. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. http://www.sidra.ibge.gov.br . Accessed February 2, 2005.

 IBGE. 1997. Diagnóstico ambiental da Amazônia Legal. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics,  IBGE/DGC/Derna-Degeo-Decar, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil).

 IBGE. 2004. Banco de Dados Agregados: SIDRA. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. http://www.sidra.ibge.gov.br. Accessed February 20, 2006.

 IBGE. 2007. Production value in extractive forest activities. Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. http://sidra.ibge.gov.br. Accessed July 12, 2007. 

 INPE. 2003. Mapa de Desflorestamento da Amazônia Legal (2001). Projeto Prodes Digital 2000, 2001 e 2002 – Monitoramento da Floresta Amazônica Brasileira por Satélite. National Institute of Spatial research. http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodes. Accessed August 10, 2003.

 IPEA. 2002. Dados Macroeconômicos e Regionais. Institute for Applied Economic Research. http://www.ipeadata.gov.br. Accessed July 12, 2007.

 ISA. 2004. Terras Indígenas e Unidades de Conservação da Natureza: O desafio das sobreposições. Instituto Socioambiental, São Paulo.

Lentini, M., Pereira, D., Celentano, D., Pereira, R., 2005. Fatos Florestais da Amazônia 2005. Imazon, Belém (Brazil).

Lentini, M., Veríssimo, A., Sobral, L., 2004. Forest Facts in the Brazilian Amazon 2003. Imazon, Belém (Brazil).

Martini, A., Rosa, N., Uhl, C., 1994. An attempt to predict which Amazonian tree species may be threatened by logging activities. Environmental Conservation 21, 152-162.

MDIC. 2007. Banco de dados de exportações Brasileiras. Brazilian Ministry of Development, Industry and International Commerce. http://aliceweb.mdic.gov.br. Accessed March 10, 2007.

Nepstad, D., Veríssimo, A., Alencar, A., Nobre, C., Lima, E., Lefebvre, P., Schlesinger, P., Potter, C., Moutinho, P., Mendoza, E., Cochrane, M., Brooks, V., 1999. Large-scale impoverishment of Amazonian forests by logging and fire. Nature 398, 505-508.

Rankin, J.M., 1985. Forestry in the Brazilian Amazon. In: Prance, G. and T. Lovejoy (Eds.), Amazonia, Key environmental series. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 369-392.

Sabogal, C., Lentini, M., Pokorny, B., Silva, J.N., Zweede, J., Verissimo, A., Boscolo, M., 2006. Manejo Florestal Empresarial na Amazônia Brasileira: Restrições e Oportunidades. Relatório

Síntese. Cifor, Imazon, Embrapa e IFT, Belém (Brazil).

Schneider, R., Arima, E., Veríssimo, A., Barreto, P., Souza Jr., C., 2000. Sustainable Amazon: limitations and opportunities for rural development. World Bank and Imazon, Brasília and Belém (Brazil).

 Silva, N., 1997. Avaliação de Planos de Manejo Florestal Sustentável na Região de Paragominas, Pará.  Embrapa, Belém (Brazil).

Sobral, L., Veríssimo, A., Lima, E., Azevedo, T., Smeraldi, R., 2002. Acertando o Alvo 2: Consumo de Madeira Amazônica e Certificação Florestal no Estado de São Paulo. Imazon, Imaflora and Amigos da Terra, Belém (Brazil).
 
Stone, S.W., 1997. Economic trends in the timber industry of Amazonia: Survey results from Para state, 1990-1995. Journal of Developing Areas 32, 97-121.

Stone, S.W., 1998. Evolution of the Timber Industry Along an Aging Frontier: The Case of Paragominas (1990-95). World development 26, 433-448.
 
Uhl, C., Barreto, P., Veríssimo, A., Vidal, E., Amaral, P., Barros, A.C., Souza, C., Johns, J., Gerwing, J., 1997. Natural resource management in the Brazilian Amazon. Bioscience 47, 160-168.

Uhl, C., Veríssimo, A., Mattos, M.M., Brandino, Z., Vieira, I.C.G., 1991. Social, economic, and ecological consequences of selective logging in an Amazon frontier - the case of Tailandia. Forest Ecology and Management 46, 243-273.

Uhl, C., Vieira, I.C.G., 1989. Ecological Impacts of Selective Logging in the Brazilian Amazon - A Case-Study from the Paragominas Region of the State of Para. Biotropica 21, 98-106.

Veríssimo, A., Barreto, P., Tarifa, R., Uhl, C., 1995. Extraction of a high-value natural-resource in Amazônia - the case of mahogany. Forest Ecology and Management 72, 39-60.
 
Veríssimo, A., Souza Jr., C., Stone, S., Uhl, C., 1998. Zoning of timber extraction in the Brazilian Amazon. Conservation Biology 12, 128-136.

Veríssimo, A., Lima, E., Lentini, M., 2002. Pólos Madeireiros do Estado do Pará. Imazon, Belém (Brazil).

Veríssimo, A., Smeraldi, R., 1999. Acertando o alvo: consumo de madeira no mercado doméstico brasileiro e promoção da certificação florestal. Imazon, Imaflora and Amigos da Terra, Piracicaba (Brazil).

Veríssimo, A., Smeraldi, R., Azevedo, T.,. 2005. Forest Certification in Brazil: advances, innovations and challenges. In: Burger, D., J. Hess, and B. Lang (Eds.), Forest Certification: An innovative instrument in the service of sustainable development?. GTZ, Eschborn, pp. 207-217.

Vincent, J.R., 1997. Resource depletion and economic sustainability in Malaysia. Environment and Development Economics 2, 19-37.

WWF. 2000. Map of the Brazilian Biomes. In: ISA, IPAM, GTA, ISPN, IMAZON and CI (Eds.), Biodiversidade na Amazônia Brasileira. Instituto Socioambiental, Estação Liberdade, São Paulo (Brazil).

Zarin, D., Pereira, V.F.G., Raffles, H., Rabelo, F.G., Pinedo-Vasquez, M., Congalton, R.G., 2001. Landscape change in tidal floodplain near the mouth of the Amazon River. Forest Ecology

Posted 19 August 2007

Updated 22 August 2007