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.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. 1.

    Tollefson, J. Political upheaval threatens Brazil’s environmental protections. Nature 539, 147–148 (2016).

  2. 2.

    Tollefson, J. Brazil’s lawmakers renew push to weaken environmental rules. Nature 557, 17 (2018).

  3. 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. 4.

    Creutzig, V. et al. Towards demand-side solutions for mitigating climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 268–271 (2018).

  5. 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. 6.

    Soares Filho, B. S. et al. Cracking Brazil’s forest code. Science 344, 363–364 (2014).

  7. 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. 8.

    Viola, E. & Franchini, M. Brazil and Climate Change: Beyond the Amazon (Routledge, New York, 2018).

  9. 9.

    Fearnside, P. Brazilian politics threaten environmental policies. Sci. Policy Forum 353, 746–748 (2016).

  10. 10.

    Portaria no. 68, 14 January 2017; http://go.nature.com/2u4gJFm

  11. 11.

    Medida Provisória no. 756, 19 December 2016; http://go.nature.com/2vhtste

  12. 12.

    Law no. 13.465, 11 July 2017; http://go.nature.com/2f7CbYj

  13. 13.

    Viola, E. & Franchini, M. Brazilian climate politics 2005–2012: ambivalence and paradox. WIRES Clim. Change 5, 677–688 (2014).

  14. 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. 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. 16.

    Gignac, R. & Matthews, H. Allocating a 2 °C cumulative carbon budget to countries. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 075004 (2015).

  17. 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. 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. 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. 20.

    CD-LINKS Stocktaking/Fast-track Database (version 1.0) (CD-Links, 2016); https://go.nature.com/2HM208O

  21. 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. 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. 23.

    ADVANCE wiki; http://themasites.pbl.nl/models/advance/index.php/ADVANCE_wiki

Download references

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

  1. COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    • Pedro R. R. Rochedo
    • , Roberto Schaeffer
    • , Alexandre Szklo
    • , André F. P. Lucena
    • , Alexandre Koberle
    •  & Regis Rathmann
  2. Centro de Sensoriamento Remoto, UFMG, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil

    • Britaldo Soares-Filho
    •  & Juliana Leroy Davis
  3. Instituto de Relações Internacionais, UNB, Brasília, DF, Brazil

    • Eduardo Viola
  4. Departamento de Engenharia de Produção, UFMG, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil

    • Juliana Leroy Davis
    •  & Raoni Rajão

Authors

  1. Search for Pedro R. R. Rochedo in:

  2. Search for Britaldo Soares-Filho in:

  3. Search for Roberto Schaeffer in:

  4. Search for Eduardo Viola in:

  5. Search for Alexandre Szklo in:

  6. Search for André F. P. Lucena in:

  7. Search for Alexandre Koberle in:

  8. Search for Juliana Leroy Davis in:

  9. Search for Raoni Rajão in:

  10. Search for Regis Rathmann in:

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.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roberto Schaeffer.

Supplementary information

  1. Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Results, Supplementary Discussion, Supplementary References

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0213-y

Further reading