Sunday, May 9, 2010

Priorities of the Brazilian Government regarding Deforestation

Carl


Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva

Because many of the countries that the Amazon resides in have bad economies, the main priority that drives many of the people and organizations to strip the Amazon of its resources is money. The Amazon rainforest is a huge untapped mass of resources, like trees minerals and oil, which can yield a high profit by selling them to more developed countries. Because of this, “the simplest solution to these [economic] problems appears to lie in the resources of the Amazon. The governments hope that they can feed their poor and repay their debts through the development of the rainforest” (Darv). The nations that the Amazon lies within, argue that because countries like the United States have ravaged their environment for resources, they have all rights to use the Amazon how they please. “Developing the rainforest is a short-term solution at best. It quickly uses up resources that cannot be replaced,” and, “when the resources have been used, the economic and social problems that the Amazonian nations stared with will remain” (Darv). This means that even if the Amazonian nations can ravage the rainforest of its resources, it will be in vain because once it is gone, they will require a new source of revenue.

The governments of the world have the power to stop the destruction through laws and restrictions, but many of the laws that were made to protect the rainforest are weak and not well enforced. In addition, many of the more developed countries look the other way because the Amazon is a cheap way of getting the resources they need at a premium. “Government permits are required to log in the Amazon. In reality, however, environmental agencies lack the authority to enforce logging regulations” (Darv). Because there aren’t enough officers in Brazil’s environmental protection agency to patrol even half of the rainforest, many of the mining and deforesting isn’t caught or stopped. “Ninety-four percent of all fines that the officers do impose are thrown out in court. The result is that 80 percent of all logging in the Amazon in done illegally” (Darv).

Because money is such a powerful motivator for those who take the resources from the Amazon, the world’s governments can use their economic power to slow or even stop the destruction of the rainforest. If an Amazonian nation wanted, “to build a road into the Amazon, the chances are good that it will turn to a foreign bank for help” (Darv). Without a loan to pay for the build, the Amazonian nation wouldn’t be able to complete the build. The governments of Brazil and all over the world need to band together under the Catholic Social Teaching theme of the Role of Government and Subsidiary to increase their control of the illegal destruction of the Amazon. Catholics have to petition their governments to stop them from overlooking the disrespect with which miners and lumberers are treating the rainforest and its inhabitants.

5 comments:

  1. Josh

    Firstly, Carl raises an excellent argument that illuminates the world’s truly globalized state of affairs: the economic motivation of the international community in part enables the destruction of Brazil’s rainforests. Conversely, the exploitation of this interconnected system could very well obstruct the decline of Amazonia.

    Furthermore, with regard to the traditionally inadequate enforcement of existing legislations, the situation must be first placed into context. “The formulation and implementation of policies to preserve rain forests is difficult because of the multiple causes of their destruction” (Wright 315). Historically, Brazil’s “urban centers have been favored over rural areas in terms of development. As a result, the economic and social problems of rural areas have been largely ignored. This neglect is a major cause of the migration of rural people to the cities” and the encroachment upon the Amazon rainforest (Willner 285). Such ineffectiveness has driven people to the Landless People’s Movement, which “is supported vigorously by the Catholic Church; … nuns, pastors, priests and lay church members work as activists to bring legal support, organization, research, and spiritual encouragement to the masses of poor people in search of land rights” (Crittenden). Such participation of Brazil’s Catholic majority must drive the country toward resolute legislation and thereby against deforestation.

    Indeed, efforts to curtail environmental destruction have achieved “modest success” through recent legislations (Wright 315; Osava). Measures are fortunately effecting tangible change; however, the endurance of the Amazon depends strongly upon the consistency of such legislations. The Brazilian government and international organizations must responsibly apply the Catholic Social Teaching of subsidiarity to remedy that which individual citizens cannot. The efforts and insistence of every nation toward sustainable use of rainforests can converge to formulate an aggregate silencer of social injustice. The gallant labors of the government—as well as the participation of the international community—are therefore essential in the “preservation of [the Amazon’s] biodiversity reservoirs” (Wright 315).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Once again emphasizing Carl’s point, it is crucial to recognize that “Brazilian deforestation is strongly correlated to the economic health of the country” (Butler). During the past three decades, hundreds of people have died in land wars. Several others have had to live with the fear that they might be killed “by those who profit from the theft of timber and land.” Unfortunately, in an area ruled by guns, chain saws, and bulldozers, government officials in Brazil are often corrupt and ineffective (Wallace).

    Raimundo de Souza came to the Amazon 15 years ago looking for land. After he had bought roughly 120 acres, he was forced by more powerful farmers, “who roam[ed] this Wild West territory with rifles strapped to their backs”, to sell much of it for a meager amount. Later, someone shot and killed Mr. de Souza’s 23 year old stepson, but no one was arrested for the crime. The residents of the area claimed it had been this way for decades. Throughout the huge expanse of the Amazon, the state had been virtually nonexistent, whether in the form of police officers or records of land ownership. This lack of involvement by the government gave way to illegal land seizures “often at the tip of a gun barrel.”

    Brazil’s government, however, is trying to impose order by using a new law, which was approved by Brazil’s Congress in June. For the first time, the government is formally establishing who owns the land, thus enabling it to track who is responsible for the forest clearings. Thanks to this new mandate, the government is actively participating in the prevention of further deforestation, because logically it would not be feasible for individuals themselves to cohesively manage land. This involvement to help society allows the government to fulfill its role presented in the principles of subsidiarity.

    -Jessica

    ReplyDelete
  3. My classmate here present a very compelling argument about government and their lack of regulations on industries because of short economic gain. This is because the government does not know how to market saving the rainforest. "Will consumers pay a premium for products as a way in saving the rainforest?" (London/Kelly). If the governments that have rainforest manage to solve this problem, they will be following the Catholic Social Teaching of Stewardship by protecting the forests as well following the Common Good by reserving the resources for longer use.


    Also big companies such as logging and farming are going over the government’s demands and still do activity in the rainforests illegally. Also many big named companies get most of their lumber from the rainforest."McDonald's needs 800 square miles of trees to make the amount of paper they need for a year's supply of packaging...[and] British Columbia manufactures 7, 500,000 pairs of chopsticks a day, and the demand for fuel wood is so high that predictions say that there will be a shortage by the year 2000" (Stock/Rochen). These companies need to understand that they need to conserve the rainforest, otherwise the rainforest will be used up and there will be more lumber left for the businesses.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I feel like the governments themselves are also struggling in the situations like this. They have to stand in a oxymoronic situation in which they have to work for their country and also for the world. They are trying to conserve the environment as well as to exploit it. Tempted by the resources and the profits that can be made by them, the Brazilian government has been easy on legal protections on the forest. "Tax incentives for large corporations and landholders and weak environmental protection laws have added to the destruction" (Johnson, 73).
    Recently, the Brazilian government tried to regulate burnings, logging, and landholdings by not issuing new license and canceling permits; however, this led to increasing of illegal logging and the as did the overall amount of deforestation. It is clear that the Brazilian government and population are not very interested in conservation and are letting big corporations to do whatever they please to do.
    At this time, the world and the governments that are related in the Amazon forest need to realize that the forest is everyone's property and should be conserved for the world and for next generations as well. In order to do this, the governments need to act fast before all the resources run out and the forest is gone forever.

    -Grace

    ReplyDelete
  5. Reflective, thorough look at the implications of deforestation. Great link and use of the video "Making Forests in a Day" to stress your points. Presentation was excellent. It was also good to see that your comments reflected thoughtfulness not only to the main postings but to each others words.

    ReplyDelete