Search

The article offers information on the threats to an indigenous tribe of Amazon from an hydropower infrastructure plan proposed by the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR). Topics discussed include decline in the Amazonian deforestation rates due to Brazil's environmental policies; conduction of an environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the Tapajós Hydroelectric Complex (THC); and mentions that the former President Dilma Rousseff redrew the boundaries of Amazon National Park (ANP).

For many people throughout much of the world today, the terms ".Amazon" and "rain forest" are synonymous-- indeed, it seems as if the two must have always intertwined. However, while this much-invoked realm of shimmering, fragile nature, together with its ferocious jungle alter ego, does have deep roots in the past, its present-day incarnation has much to do with the global environmental movement that began emerging in the 1960s and has continued to morph over time. This article examines contemporary representations of the Amazon with an eye to what is now changing, as well as why. It underscores the key role that these depictions play in shaping policy, which gives them an importance far transcending purely narrative concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Land-use regulations are a critical component of forest governance and conservation strategies, but their effectiveness in shaping landholder behaviour is poorly understood. We conducted a spatial and temporal analysis of the Brazilian ForestCode (BFC) to understand the patterns of regulatory compliance over time and across changes in the policy, and the implications of these compliance patterns for the perceived costs to landholders and environmental performance of agricultural landscapes in the southern Amazon state of Mato Grosso. Landholdings tended to remain in compliance or not according to their status at the beginning of the study period. The perceived economic burden of BFC compliance on soya bean and beef producers (US$3-5.6 billion in net present value of the land)may in part explain themassive, successful campaign launched by the farm lobby to change the BFC. The ecological benefits of compliance (e.g. greater connectivity and carbon) with the BFC are diffuse and do not compete effectively with the economic benefits of non-compliance that are perceived by landholders. Volatile regulation of land-use decisions that affect billions in economic rent that could be captured is an inadequate forest governance instrument; effectiveness of such regulations may increase when implemented in tandem with positive incentives for forest conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]