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 options
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
$99.00
only $8.25 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
from$8.99
All prices are NET prices.




References
- 1.
Tollefson, J. Political upheaval threatens Brazil’s environmental protections. Nature 539, 147–148 (2016).
- 2.
Tollefson, J. Brazil’s lawmakers renew push to weaken environmental rules. Nature 557, 17 (2018).
- 3.
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).
- 4.
Creutzig, V. et al. Towards demand-side solutions for mitigating climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 268–271 (2018).
- 5.
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
- 6.
Soares Filho, B. S. et al. Cracking Brazil’s forest code. Science 344, 363–364 (2014).
- 7.
Crouzeilles, R., Feltran-Barbieri, R., Ferreira, M. S. & Strassburg, B. B. N. Hard times for the Brazilian environment. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1213 (2017).
- 8.
Viola, E. & Franchini, M. Brazil and Climate Change: Beyond the Amazon (Routledge, New York, 2018).
- 9.
Fearnside, P. Brazilian politics threaten environmental policies. Sci. Policy Forum 353, 746–748 (2016).
- 10.
Portaria no. 68, 14 January 2017; http://go.nature.com/2u4gJFm
- 11.
Medida Provisória no. 756, 19 December 2016; http://go.nature.com/2vhtste
- 12.
Law no. 13.465, 11 July 2017; http://go.nature.com/2f7CbYj
- 13.
Viola, E. & Franchini, M. Brazilian climate politics 2005–2012: ambivalence and paradox. WIRES Clim. Change 5, 677–688 (2014).
- 14.
PRODES – Monitoramento da Floresta Amazônica Brasileira por Satélite (Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais database, 2017); http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodes/index.php
- 15.
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).
- 16.
Gignac, R. & Matthews, H. Allocating a 2 °C cumulative carbon budget to countries. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 075004 (2015).
- 17.
Rocha, M. et al. Analysis of Equitable Mitigation Contribution of Countries (Climate Analytics, 2015); http://climateanalytics.org/files/climate_analytics_report_sept_2015.pdf
- 18.
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).
- 19.
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).
- 20.
CD-LINKS Stocktaking/Fast-track Database (version 1.0) (CD-Links, 2016); https://go.nature.com/2HM208O
- 21.
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).
- 22.
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
- 23.
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
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:
Further reading
-
Can global models provide insights into regional mitigation strategies? A diagnostic model comparison study of bioenergy in Brazil
Climatic Change (2022)
-
Twenty-first century droughts have not increasingly exacerbated fire season severity in the Brazilian Amazon
Scientific Reports (2021)
-
Carbon prospecting in tropical forests for climate change mitigation
Nature Communications (2021)
-
Deforestation reduces rainfall and agricultural revenues in the Brazilian Amazon
Nature Communications (2021)
-
Brazil’s sugarcane embitters the EU-Mercosur trade talks
Scientific Reports (2021)