The Brazilian Senate has been considering a proposed amendment to the Brazilian Constitution that if approved, would weaken Brazilian environmental legislation. Specifically, it would threaten the ability to create Conservation Units (Brazil\’s equivalent to protected areas)-most of all within the Amazon region. The amendment, PEC No 38 /1999, would limit the amount of land occupied by Conservation Units and Indigenous Lands taken together to no more than 50% of the total land area of the Federal State in which they are located. The proposal assumes, mistakenly, that Conservation Units are hindrances to Brazil\’s economic development. In addition, the amendment ignores the fundamental differences between Conservation Units and Indigenous Lands, failing to acknowledge that the objectives of each designation are distinct.
It is necessary to highlight the differences between Conservation Units and Indigenous Lands. Conservation Units are created based on biological characteristics and aim primarily to conserve nature, whereas Indigenous Lands are designated based on social and cultural features. Conservation Units are areas with relevant natural features, instituted by legal act of the government, aimed at conservation and they have defined boundaries. Indigenous Lands on the other hand, are demarcated areas permanently inhabited by Indigenous communities and the land is used for their productive activities. Indigenous Lands are essential for natural resource preservation, which is necessary for the communities\’ welfare, as well as for their physical and cultural reproduction, according to their uses, customs and traditions. Such lands belong to the Union, but recognize the Indigenous communities as the permanent landholders and grant them exclusive use of the land and all existing rivers and lakes.
By ignoring the differences between Conservation Units and Indigenous Lands, the PEC, if approved, could generate situations where creating a new Conservation Unit would not be possible. Under this amendment, even if an area contains great biological relevance or is considered endangered, if 50% of the State\’s territory is already covered by Conservation Units and Indigenous Lands, a new Conservation Unit is not be permitted. The PEC does not recognize that Conservation Units are important areas for conserving biodiversity and that Indigenous Land designation alone cannot guarantee the same level of protection for biologically sensitive areas.
This proposal will mostly affect the States of the Amazon region. The Amazon region contains significant unaltered natural areas, yet these same areas are under increasing land conversion pressure. From August 2001 to August 2002, an estimated 10,190 square miles of the Amazon was deforested for agricultural and grazing purposes-a 40% increase from the same period ending August 2001 (AP July 2, 2003).
The principal argument of the pro-PEC Senators is that the Conservation Units represent a hindrance to Brazil\’s economic development. However, this belief is mistaken. The last 500 years of irrational use of natural resources in Brazil and Latin America has resulted in minimal economic development compared to huge biodiversity losses. This model of economic development brought about the destruction of 94% of the Atlantic Rainforest and 80% of the Cerrado (Brazilian savannas), but did not produce a society with less economic or social discord. Rather the opposite, it privileged a small portion of the population while an unknown number of species disappeared. This shows that the country\’s economic development does not depend on the destruction of natural areas. Protecting a portion of the country in Conservation Units will not cause the Brazilian economy to come to a screeching halt.
It is also important to note that currently only 3% of the national territory is protected by Full Protection Conservation Units (IUCN categories I, II and III), in which direct use of the natural resources held within is prohibited. The Sustainable Use Conservation Units (IUCN categories IV, V and VI) cover about 7% of the national territory and do permit the direct use of natural resources to combine social and economic development with nature conservation. This shows that in reality, in 97% of the Brazilian territory some level of productive activities is permitted. Additionally, a large part of the country is already impacted by human beings, but is under-utilized. These areas are potentially suitable for increasing productive activities in order to improve the economic and social situation of the country.
The vote for PEC No 38/1999 was scheduled for June 11th, but thanks to efforts from NGOs and a letter-writing campaign targeting Brazilian Senators organized by the Rede Nacional Pró-Unidades de Conservação (National Network in favor of Conservation Units), it was postponed indefinitely. Because of civil society\’s opposition, senators should be more aware about the situation and not allow the mistakes of the past to be repeated in the Amazon. Senators should also realize that the PEC does not manifest the longings of the Brazilian society and all mankind, but rather manifests the interests of isolated groups interested in advancing the agricultural frontier into the last untouched forests of the country.
ParksWatch – Brazil: July 2003
See www.redeprouc.org.br for more information on the PEC No 38/1999 and this letter-writing campaign (their website is in Portuguese only).