What we are witnessing is a political instrumentalization of science. Furthermore, the issue needs to be put into perspective so as to consider the politics of deforestation control in Brazil.
• Following a great hike in deforestation, the Federal government (1st Lula’s term), in 2004, launched the Programme for the Prevention and Control of Deforestation in the Amazon (PPCDAm), grouping together different national ministries to thereby better promote coordinated action. This programme’s axes of action were 1) land regularisation, 2) monitoring and policing of illegal deforestation, and 3) promotion of alternative sustainable activities. The programme was a success especially due to its integrated approach and has shown results, the reduction in the deforestation rate that Lula so proudly presented in international events and negotiations.
• In recent years there has been a slight increase in deforestation rate, but not yet to the levels of 2004. However what is most important is the dismantling of deforestation control policy (and environmental policy more generally) since Bolsonaro came to power, his denial of facts and science, and his rhetoric and discourses against indigenous peoples, environmental NGOs and in favour of a “development” at all costs in he Amazon. A “fire day” (!!!) organised by farmers this month was incentivised by Bolsonaro’s discourses and authorities did nothing to prevent it. Fires have always occurred but never incentivised by the President! And the scale of destruction this year can also be directly linked to the dismantling of Amazon deforestation control by the federal government.
• On measuring deforestation, two main systems of satellite monitoring are used. The PRODES has been used since 1988 to identify the broad areas of deforestation, and enables calculation of annual rates of deforestation. It remains the main system informing governmental strategies. The other system is DETER, which was created in 2004; it is a real-time system, inputting data every day thus allowing for swift control and punitive actions. It is hence now possible to know in real-time ‘where’ deforestation is occurring and, with the advent of the geo-referenced rural registry (the CAR), ‘who’ has deforested, thus enabling rapid surveillance and enforcement actions. The integration of actions in crime investigation by sharing information with different entities, the use of intelligence, the coordination between the army, federal police and Ibama has helped law enforcement, notably through ‘ostensive’ operations aimed at psychologically deterring deforestation. During Lula’s and Rousseff terms especially.
• All this monitoring and enforcement mechanism is now at stake with lack of funding (now with Norway and Germany pulling out) and Bolsonaro’s antipathy towards environmental protection; and his denial of satellite-measured data.
• While agribusiness has been in favour of less restrictions on production in the Amazon and always complained and tried to dismantle these in the national congress where its lobby controls a great portion of the parliamentarians, even them seem now unpleased with Bolsonaro as this situation is affecting Brazil’s international image and hence their ability to export commodities. You start hearing many high profile agribusiness-related parliamentarians criticising the government.
This would be a great topic to discuss over a coffee, I will stop here.