Skip to Main Content
Have library access? Log in through your library
Research Report

The context of REDD+ in Brazil: Drivers, agents and institutions

Peter H. May
Brent Millikan
Maria Fernanda Gebara
Copyright Date: Jan. 1, 2011
Pages: 88
OPEN ACCESS
https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep02198
  • Cite this Item

Table of Contents

  1. (pp. 1-2)

    This report is a contribution to CIFOR’s multiyear Global Comparative Study on REDD+,¹ which aims to provide policy makers, practitioners and donors with strategic information on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries.²

    This country profile for Brazil focuses on the Brazilian Legal Amazon region, which is made up of all or part of 9 states³ (Acre, Amapá, Amazonas, Maranhão, Mato Grosso, Pará, Rondônia, Roraima and Tocantins), and in particular on the Amazon rainforest biome (consisting primarily of dense and open broadleaf tropical rainforest). Some reference is made to areas in...

  2. (pp. 3-18)

    The Amazon biome spans 9 countries and a total area of 6.4 million km², of which nearly two-thirds (63%) is located within Brazil’s national boundaries.⁴ The Amazon River basin—with headwaters and tributaries located in the Andes cordillera, Guiana Shield and Brazilian savannahs (cerrado)—covers approximately 7 million km², equivalent to 25% of the land surface of South America. With more than 1000 rivers and tributaries, the Amazon is the world’s largest hydrographic basin and the source of 15% of all fresh water on the planet.⁵

    The Brazilian Amazon, covering 4.1 million km², accounts for one-third of the world’s remaining...

  3. (pp. 19-32)

    The Brazilian government has adopted the following positions with regard to international agreements related to the forestry sector:

    UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD): ratified in 1994

    UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): signed in 1992

    International Timber Trade Organization (ITTO) (1994 agreement): ratified in 1997

    Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES): ratified in 1975

    RAMSAR Agreement on Wetlands: ratified in 1992

    Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade (FLEGT): not signed

    UN Forum on Forests: member state

    UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP): ratified in 2008

    To date, the Brazilian government has been resistant...

  4. (pp. 33-36)

    Following are some examples of key national public policies that have facilitated deforestation and degradation in the Brazilian Amazon.

    Large-scale infrastructure projects. The Programa de Aceleração do Crescimento (PAC), launched in February 2007, involves an ambitious portfolio of large-scale infrastructure projects, many targeting the Legal Amazon, such as the Rio Madeira hydroelectric dams and the paving of the BR-319 highway (Manaus–Porto Velho). The PAC has been marked by a reversion to conventional paradigms of economic growth, lobbying interests of powerful economic groups (such as construction conglomerates), patronage relations with regional political elites and the ‘politicisation’ of environmental licensing procedures,...

  5. (pp. 37-56)

    The Brazilian government has more than 20 public policies intended to have positive impacts (direct and indirect) on climate change. Most of them are related to energy initiatives. The country’s main challenge, however, is the problem of deforestation, responsible for up to 75% of Brazil’s CO2 emissions (MCT 2009).

    Currently, there are 2 macro policies for climate change in Brazil: the National Plan for Climate Change, approved in November 2008 and presented at COP 14 in Poznań, and the National Policy for Climate Change, which was approved by the National Congress and signed into law by former President Lula in...

  6. (pp. 57-62)

    This chapter considers the implications of REDD+ strategy for the ‘3Es’ of forest policy implementation in developing areas: efficiency, efficacy and equity. That is, to what extent is the chosen strategy likely to result in an efficient (lowest cost per tonne of carbon) basis for reduction in emissions from deforestation and degradation? Is the strategy likely to be effective in terms of the total volume of carbon whose emissions are avoided? To what extent does this strategy respond to concerns for equitable distribution of benefits from the proceeds of local efforts towards global climate mitigation, to the extent that these...