Excluding the Amazon’s Productive Sectors Doesn’t Help the Forest

Source: Poder360 
Author: Francy Nava 
Image: Shutterstock

"We live in an environment that fosters division and hostility. The anxiety caused by the climate emergency drives many to point fingers at productive sectors and reject effective private-sector efforts and solutions. As a result, our energy is scattered, we lose time, and we fail to unite in the search for solutions for the Amazon. 

There is a tendency to stigmatize loggers and rural producers in the Amazon, as though they are inherently part of the problem. This tendency is fueled by prejudice and misinformation. Of course, crimes must be stopped and punished with the full force of the law. 

But in the face of the climate catastrophe upon us, we need dialogue, understanding—not exclusion, as if we were enemies. We are all in the same boat: the challenge of generating prosperity, reducing inequality in our country, and protecting nature while sustainably using its resources. 

The recent history of the Amazon’s occupation is tied to the exploitation of its natural resources. Just five decades ago, Brazilians from across the country were migrating to the region, encouraged by the federal government to extract timber and clear land for ranching and farming. 

INCRA (the National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform) provided land plots, and banks offered loans on the condition that the forest be cleared for productive use. If settlers failed to produce—and therefore didn’t deforest—they lost their land. 

A GENERATIONAL SHIFT 

We have learned a lot since then. Two generations later, the situation has reversed: federal and state agencies now monitor and penalize timber extraction and deforestation unless approved under strict environmental laws, and banks deny loans to those who do not comply. As Brazilians, we should be proud of the robust legal framework we have built over the years and strive to ensure it is upheld. 

We are still at the end of this transition, in the midst of a steep learning curve. Landowners and entrepreneurs in the Amazon are in this transition too. The older generation lived through the earlier era, when logging and deforestation were encouraged, laws were more lenient, and enforcement was weaker. 

They have learned—just as we all have—and have been offered alternative income-generating opportunities, sustainable logging techniques, and integrated agroforestry systems. 

Today, the Amazon’s agribusiness model is a mix of farming, ranching, sustainable logging, and carbon credit production. Agribusiness is highly sensitive to climate and market fluctuations. This diversified model provides greater stability. 

Carbon credits, by rewarding landowners for conserving forests, help enable and encourage full compliance with environmental regulations—which, in the Amazon, mandate that 80% of a rural property must remain as preserved forest, while the remaining 20% may be legally cleared with proper environmental licensing. 

In the past, many landowners and entrepreneurs received fines for environmental infractions and illegal logging—often the result of honest mistakes by employees or even inspectors. 

Timber extraction, like all activity in the Amazon, is technically and logistically complex. Environmental laws and inspectors are—and must be—strict. 

But it is unreasonable to prevent individuals from working today based on past infractions, particularly when they have paid fines, fulfilled legal agreements, or proven their innocence. 

SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY 

Being a logger is not a crime. Sustainable logging is a scientifically based technique that can stimulate forests to absorb more carbon. By selectively removing older trees every 30 years or so, space is created for younger trees to grow, increasing carbon uptake. 

This and other practices are part of a set of methods known as Reduced Impact Logging (RIL), recognized by the scientific community. 

Institutions like Embrapa (Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation) have published studies on the benefits of RIL techniques:Increased productivity; Cost reduction; Enhanced forest regeneration; Biodiversity conservation 

Other organizations, like the Tropical Forest Institute (IFT), serve as training hubs to disseminate these techniques to workers willing to comply with regulations and make legal reserves productive over multiple sustainable harvest cycles. 

With this approach, many timber businesses have transformed into forest enterprises, adopting sustainable forest management guided by plans approved by environmental authorities. This planning enables “micro-surgeries” in the forest, extracting timber with minimal impact. 

Some of these forest enterprises go even further, supporting social programs that positively impact nearby communities. This qualifies them for socio-environmental certifications like FSC (Forest Stewardship Council), which ensure the preservation or enhancement of ecosystem services, worker rights, local communities, and Indigenous Peoples—while guaranteeing wood traceability through chain-of-custody systems. 

Brazil has one of the best wood traceability systems in the world, tracking from tree to end product. We must enforce this tool—the Forest Origin Document (DOF)—and crack down on fraud, not criminalize the entire industry. 

Every economic sector has vulnerabilities—be they environmental, labor-related, or sanitary. That’s no reason to abandon productive activities, but rather to strengthen oversight, which, in the case of the environment, is already quite robust in Brazil, and ensure the law is upheld. 

The Forest Concessions Law resulted from an alliance among environmentalists, loggers, and farmers. Between 2004 and 2005, the bill was stalled in Congress. Organizations like Greenpeace joined forces with industry groups in a letter advocating for its passage. 

Then-Environment Minister Tasso Azevedo created a working group that brought all parties to the table. The law, passed in 2006, was a result of concessions from all sides and proves that sustainable production is the best way to keep forests standing. If we were able to unite back then, why not now—when we face an unprecedented climate emergency? 

If we want to conserve the Amazon, we must work with the landowners and entrepreneurs who live there—and who carry the history of the region’s occupation. Through rigorous due diligence, we can distinguish irredeemable offenders from those genuinely trying to do better. 

Once that distinction is made, the full weight of the law must fall on the criminals—while we extend a hand to responsible entrepreneurs, so they can play the vital role of protecting our nature. 

Most of them have already embraced this cause. Attacking their reputations and preventing them from working only harms the Amazon. On the contrary—it incentivizes a return to the destructive practices of the past."