Abstract
In exchange for political support, the Brazilian government is signalling landholders to increase deforestation, putting the country’s contribution to the Paris Agreement at risk1. The President of Brazil has signed provisionary acts and decrees lowering environmental licensing requirements, suspending the ratification of indigenous lands, reducing the size of protected areas and facilitating land grabbers to obtain the deeds of illegally deforested areas2. This could undermine the success of Brazil’s CO2 emission reductions through control of deforestation in the previous decade. Integrated assessment models are tools to assess progress in fulfilling global efforts to curb climate change3,4. Using integrated assessment models developed for Brazil, we explore 2 °C-compliant CO2 emission scenarios estimating the effort needed in other sectors of the economy to compensate for the weakening of environmental governance, potentially resulting in higher deforestation emissions. We found that the risk of reversals of recent trends in deforestation governance could impose a burden on other sectors that would need to deploy not yet mature technologies to compensate for higher emissions from land-use change. The abandonment of deforestation control policies and the political support for predatory agricultural practices make it impossible to meet targets consistent with Brazil’s contribution to a 2 °C world.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Tollefson, J. Political upheaval threatens Brazil’s environmental protections. Nature 539, 147–148 (2016).
Tollefson, J. Brazil’s lawmakers renew push to weaken environmental rules. Nature 557, 17 (2018).
van Vuuren, D. et al. Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 391–397 (2018).
Creutzig, V. et al. Towards demand-side solutions for mitigating climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 268–271 (2018).
Estimativas Anuais de Emissões de Gases de Efeito Estufa no Brasil 3rd edn (Brazil Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e Comunicações, 2016); https://go.nature.com/2t0WWrO
Soares Filho, B. S. et al. Cracking Brazil’s forest code. Science 344, 363–364 (2014).
Crouzeilles, R., Feltran-Barbieri, R., Ferreira, M. S. & Strassburg, B. B. N. Hard times for the Brazilian environment. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1213 (2017).
Viola, E. & Franchini, M. Brazil and Climate Change: Beyond the Amazon (Routledge, New York, 2018).
Fearnside, P. Brazilian politics threaten environmental policies. Sci. Policy Forum 353, 746–748 (2016).
Portaria no. 68, 14 January 2017; http://go.nature.com/2u4gJFm
Medida Provisória no. 756, 19 December 2016; http://go.nature.com/2vhtste
Law no. 13.465, 11 July 2017; http://go.nature.com/2f7CbYj
Viola, E. & Franchini, M. Brazilian climate politics 2005–2012: ambivalence and paradox. WIRES Clim. Change 5, 677–688 (2014).
PRODES – Monitoramento da Floresta Amazônica Brasileira por Satélite (Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais database, 2017); http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodes/index.php
Messner, D., Schellnhuber, J., Rahmstorf, S. & Klingenfeld, D. The budget approach: a framework for a global transformation toward a low-carbon economy. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2, 031003 (2010).
Gignac, R. & Matthews, H. Allocating a 2 °C cumulative carbon budget to countries. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 075004 (2015).
Rocha, M. et al. Analysis of Equitable Mitigation Contribution of Countries (Climate Analytics, 2015); http://climateanalytics.org/files/climate_analytics_report_sept_2015.pdf
Lucon, O., Romeiro, V. & Fransen, T. Bridging the Gap Between Energy and Climate Policies in Brazil —Policy Options to Reduce Energy-Related GHG Emissions (World Resources Institute, Washington DC, 2015).
Kanitkar, T., Jayaraman, T., D’Souza, M. & Purkayastha, P. Carbon budgets for climate change mitigation: a GAMS-based emissions model. Curr. Sci. 104, 1200–1206 (2013).
CD-LINKS Stocktaking/Fast-track Database (version 1.0) (CD-Links, 2016); https://go.nature.com/2HM208O
Soares Filho, B. S., Rajão, R., Merry, F., Rodrigues, H., Davis, J., Lima, L., Macedo, M., Coe, M., Carneiro, A. & Santiago, L. Brazil’s Market for Trading Forest Certificates. Plos One 11, e0152311 (2016).
Modelagem Setorial de Opções de Baixo Carbono para Agricultura, Florestas e Outros Usos do Solo (AFOLU) Technical Report (MCTIC, 2015); https://go.nature.com/2MpDIVJ
ADVANCE wiki; http://themasites.pbl.nl/models/advance/index.php/ADVANCE_wiki
Acknowledgements
The data of the energy system model, compiled in the Supplementary Information, follow the format and template of an international effort on climate and energy systems modelling, the so-called CD-Links project (www.cdlinks.org), where the BLUES model used in this study is registered. A.K., A.S., A.F.P.L., E.V. and R.S. received support from the Brazilian Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). B.S.-F., J.L.D. and Ra.R. received support from the Climate and Land Use Alliance (CLUA), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG), CNPq and the Humboldt Foundation. P.R.R.R. and Re.R. received support from the Brazilian Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES). The authors also thank B. Strassburg for some initial discussions on the subject of this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.S., A.F.P.L. and R.S. performed the basic integrated modelling and conceived the methodological procedure. A.K. and P.R.R.R. were responsible for the energy system modelling and the final writing of the Supplementary Information. B.S.-F., J.L.D. and Ra.R. performed the land-use modelling and contributed to writing the manuscript and the Supplementary Information. E.V. developed the political analysis and contributed to writing the manuscript and the Supplementary Information. Re.R. was responsible for the review of the land-use results.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Results, Supplementary Discussion, Supplementary References
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rochedo, P.R.R., Soares-Filho, B., Schaeffer, R. et al. The threat of political bargaining to climate mitigation in Brazil. Nature Clim Change 8, 695–698 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0213-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0213-y
This article is cited by
-
Shifting waves of shipping: a review on global shipping projections and methodologies
Journal of Shipping and Trade (2024)
-
Intensification of climate change impacts on agriculture in the Cerrado due to deforestation
Nature Sustainability (2024)
-
Protecting Life and Lung: Protected Areas Affect Fine Particulate Matter and Respiratory Hospitalizations in the Brazilian Amazon Biome
Environmental and Resource Economics (2024)
-
Long-term activity of social insects responsible for the physical fertility of soils in the tropics
Scientific Reports (2023)
-
Impacts of land-surface heterogeneities and Amazonian deforestation on the wet season onset in southern Amazon
Climate Dynamics (2023)