The Amazon is the biggest rainforest in the world; its size is larger than the combination of the next two largest rainforests, which are in the Congo Basin and Indonesia. It hosts the largest river basin in the planet and the largest number of species of both plants and animals. Currently, the unsustainable economic development has greatly endangered and threatened the Amazon, as already 20% percent of its biome is already destroyed and there is a high potential of more damage if workable solutions are not found and implemented in time.
Over 750,000 square kilometres of the Amazon have been ruined since 1978. Initially, subsistence farmers who wanted to clear land to cultivate crops for their families were the major cause of deforestation. However, by the end of the 20th century, industrial activities and large-scale farming became the core drivers of deforestation. In fact, at the beginning of the 2000s, three-quarters of the Amazon's deforestation was due to the forest being cleared for cattle ranching. Fortunately, the trend began to turn around as indicated by the decline of the annual Amazon deforestation by approximately eight percent in Brazil (Silva, Rodrigues, Campos, " de Melo, 2017). Increased enforcement of the law, pressure from environmentalists, macroeconomic trends among other factors were responsible for fueling the decline of deforestation in Brazil. Even so, the trend in Brazil is not reflected in other Amazon countries because some have recorded an increased rate of deforestation since 2000.
The Amazon urgently needs interventions to prevent irreversible disasters, as it is the biggest deforestation front in the world. According to the WWF estimation, more than a quarter of the forest's biome will be bare (without trees) if the current rate of deforestation continues (Shukla, Nobre " Sellers, 2011). Fortunately, all hope is not lost as its destruction of can be minimized by focusing on the worldwide coordination of creating a system of guidelines (like REDD+).
Deforestation trends in Amazon countries
Between 2001 and 2012, deforestation in the tropics increased by 53 percent. Over 80 percent of the deforestation occurred in Brazil, Indonesia, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Malaysia. During the same period, deforestation reduced notably in 11 countries with Brazil leading (Shukla, Nobre " Sellers, 2011). Deforestation among Amazon countries varies greatly according to Global Forest Watch. The Amazon countries include the Amazonas states in Venezuela, all the states of Maranhão and Mato Grosso in Brazil
Brazil:
There has been an enormous decline in deforestation in Brazil since 2004 due to enhanced law enforcement strategies.
Peru:
Deforestation in Peru has been rising over the past ten years due to the development of the transoceanic highway, the surge of gold mining in Madre de Dios and increased logging for the development of hydrocarbon.
Colombia:
Since 2000, the level of deforestation has been roughly flat
Bolivia:
Deforestation rose sharply in 2008 and 2010 since then it has been rising at the second highest rate in the Amazon.
Ecuador:
The government's decision to open Yasuni National park for oil drilling has caused deforestation to rise between 2001 and 2012.
Venezuela:
Deforestation has been relatively flat since 2000
The Guianas: Deforestation has risen sharply in the past three years.
Direct drivers of deforestation in the Amazon countries
In the past decade, the rate of deforestation has declined but, continues at an alarming rate. Deforestation in Brazil that is responsible for half of the deforestation that has occurred in the Amazon is decreasing while deforestation in Bolivia and Peru is increasing (Shukla, Nobre " Sellers, 2011). There is high deforestation front at the place where there is existing roads or potential development of roads in the future. Human activities such as Cattle ranching and soy plantations especially in Bolivia are among the major factors that have increased the pressure for deforestation.
Cattle ranching
Since the 1970s, cattle ranching has been the main cause of deforestation in the Amazon. Most cattle ranchers feel that they are justified to clear a forest and turn it into grassland because of the benefits accrued from the cattle. Some of the benefits include; selling the beef to the urban market and having the leather and other cattle products dedicated mainly for export markets. Between 1966 and 1975, 38 percent of deforestation was attributed to cattle ranching but today, in Brazil, the figure has increased to almost 70 percent (Silva, Rodrigues, Campos, " de Melo, 2017). Since 2009, the environmental campaigners have pushed the Brazilian local government and cattle buyers to crack down on deforestation for the production of cattle. Peru, Bolivia, and Colombia, unlike Brazil still have cattle ranching as the main driver for deforestation.
Colonization and subsequent subsistence agriculture
Government colonization programs that aim to alleviate poverty or reduce urban population pressure have always used deforestation to facilitate small-scale agriculture hence meet their development goals. The programs are responsible for a high volume of deforestation as they have to clear a lot of forest plantation to either redistribute the land for subsistence farming for the urban dwellers or redistribute it to the poor.
Logging
The hardwoods found on Amazon such as Mahogany are very valuable as they are very costly in the timber market. They are therefore very attractive to loggers who harvest them in hundreds of acres without replacing them (Silva, Rodrigues, Campos, " de Melo, 2017). Even if they replaced them, the damage their heavy deforestation causes to the Amazon is great such that it would take the forest several decades to recover. Loggers either engage in selective logging (loggers selectively cut only the valuable hardwoods) or clear-cut huge areas. The damage caused by selective logging is greater as compared to that caused by clear-cut logging. Selective logging is more destructive as not does it harm the ecosystem of the rainforest, but it is also harder to account for.
Commercial Agriculture
The Brazilian scientists commercialized a new variety of Soybean claiming it would thrive best in the rainforest's climate. From the 1990s to the mid-200s, the commercialization made Soybean the greatest contributor of the deforestation in Amazon either directly or indirectly. Forests were not only directly cleared for the plantation of Soybean, but also for the thrust of new highways formed due to the commercialization of soy. The new highways further encouraged land speculation leading to ranchers and small-scale farmers getting deeper into the forest for more deforestation. Greenpeace high profile campaign committed Brazil's largest soy producers to avoiding further deforestation for more crops by 2006. However, in Bolivia and Paraguay, deforestation due to soy is still widely spread. Rice, corn, and sugar cane are other forms of commercial agriculture that contribute to Amazon's deforestation.
Grileiros
Grileiros follow logging threads into the forest with the intention of grabbing the cleared land for themselves. They manipulate the cleared land in a way that makes it look like it belongs to them (Silva, Rodrigues, Campos, " de Melo, 2017). Grileiros is a Portuguese name for cricket. The land grabbers were referred using the name because they were known for their actions of faking land titles and putting them in drawers full of hungry crickets to age them, hence making them look more valid and authentic.
Effects of Deforestation
The clearing, destruction or any form of removal of trees deliberately or by accident is referred to as deforestation. It can occur in any area where trees are densely populated but currently, it is causing a major crisis in the Amazon rainforest due to its devastating effects such as:
Loss of Habitat
Most plant and animals that have their habitat in the forest are likely not to survive in the case their homes are lost due to deforestation. In planet Earth, the plants and animals that live in the forest are approximately seventy percent. If the plants and animals fail to survive due to deforestation, it is a crisis to the world as it losses species of both animals and plants that are known and those that are unknown which is even a greater loss (Nobre, Malagutti, Domingos, Roberto, " Emanuel, 2009).
Deforestation hurts the climate of the forest by altering its temperatures. The trees in the rainforest are not only a shelter to the animals but also form a canopy for regulation of the forest's temperatures. Unregulated temperatures are not conducive to the current inhabitants of the rainforest as they are fatal.
Climate change
The destruction of trees that act as sinks for carbon can turn them into sources of carbon especially when they are burnt and the plants decompose. When there is reduced sink for carbon, there is more carbon in the atmosphere, which leads to change in climate and global warming (Llopart, Reboita, Coppola, Giorgi, da Rocha " de Souza, 2018). Lack of trees allows greenhouse gases that also contribute to global warming, to be emitted in greater amounts to the atmosphere. The global warming is currently responsible for the severe drought experienced in the Amazon. During warm and dry climates, trees, which are ‘lungs of the earth', struggle to take in greenhouse gases.
Water in the Atmosphere
Through the regulation of the water cycle, trees help control humidity. Due to deforestation, fewer trees are left, therefore; there is less water in the atmosphere to be returned to the soil. Reduced trees also lower water retention in the soil, which lowers the water table. Both cases lead to drier soils that are less fertile and therefore unable to grow healthy crops (Isadora " Flynn, 2013). This is ironic cattle-ranchers and small-scale farmers are responsible for 80 percept of Amazon's deforestation.
Soil Erosion and Flooding
Deforestation means lesser trees with lesser roots to hold soil in place or retain water in the soil (Marcovitch " Pinsky, 2014). Lack of sufficient topsoil means that the plants that the small-scale farmers do not have sufficient nutrients for their crops which would make them stop farming on that land further leaving the land barren. Without trees or crops, there is more surface runoff, and in the first instance of rain, the soil will either be washed away downstream or there will be an occurrence of flooding particularly in the coastal regions.
Loss of biodiversity.
Trees lost in deforestation lead to loss of all the plants that live below their canopy and all the animals and microorganisms that depend on their shades to survive. Most rainforests specifically the Amazon rainforest is one of the most biodiverse places in the world as they have a discovery of new species constantly. If the rainforests are destroyed, potential cures for illnesses are destroyed with them (Isadora " Flynn, 2013). According to the suggestions of projections, if the rate of deforestation on the world goes on, by 2020, mammals will be extinct. Loss of mammals potentially has a spillover effect as they support the ecosystem directly and their loss would lead to a further extinction of more species. Human beings acts of deforestation do not have the right to deprive various species rights to survive.
REDD — 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'
The destructive impacts of deforestation on biodiversity, forest livelihoods, and climate make it a major global issue (Marcovitch " Pinsky, 2014). Redd as an IIED'S (International Institute for Environment and Development) growing body aims at protecting forests, climate and livelihoods by offering a solution that involves offering an incentive that could change the way forests' resources are utilized. It pays for actions, which prevent the loss or degradation of forests by offering new ways of decreasing CO2 emissions such as carbon trading, or for the management of forests.
Though Redd has not been formally recognized by the Kyoto Convention, there has been voluntary REDD projects operating around the world. REDD's payments need tailoring towards the addressing of specific national and local drivers of deforestation for its initiatives to be effective.
How REDD works
REDD works by rewarding the developing countries that practice good forest management. It makes indiscriminate and unenforced logging, which is a poor form of forest management less profitable. The payment to the developing countries is an incentive to sustain and maintain their forests while preventing deforestation and degradation of land. REDD gets its funds from either a trust fund not dependent on offsets or from carbon trading (Countries that are industrialized offset their own carbon emissions when they transfer funds to developing countries as carbon credits). REDD's activities are less expensive as compared to other deforestation mitigation strategies such as the carbon capture (Isadora " Flynn, 2013). REDD promotes sustainable management of forests so that they can be beneficial to the plants and animals that depend on them while meeting the global requirement to impound carbon.
REDD's Challenges
REDD was not able to be recognized by Kyoto Convention due to some political and technical challenges. However, during the 2005 Conference of Parties (COP), the Coalition for Rainforest Nations ensured REDD was discussed as a major issue, and by 2008, it had become an issue for a heated debate. Some people see it as a cheap way of conserving forests while reducing carbon emissions. Other people criticized it as they perceived it as a way of absolving industrialized countries of their responsibilities of cutting down on carbon dioxide emissions. Critics also pointed out that REDD's payments could impact the developing nations negatively by weakening their land and resources (Assunção, Gandour " Rocha, 2015). The agriculture of the developing countries is also likely to get limitations due to REDD's actions.
To be effective, REDD has to avoid ‘leakage'(conservation of one area while shifting deforestation to another area), be ‘additional (directly reduce deforestation and degradation that could not have occurred even with economic changes) and establish a project baseline that measures the reduction of greenhouse emissions' progress. REDD faces critical challenges on how to share its payments and benefits.
Solving Deforestation
There are no silver bullet solutions to deforestation and land degradation as they are complex problems but certain approaches could make much difference.
Collaboration
First Nations, governments Forest product Companies and Unions often collaborate with Greenpeace to promote and cultivate responsibility in the industries that deal with forest products to ensure healthy local and international communities (Paulo, Raissa " Claudia, 2016). Greenpeace has been embraced and received the support of most global companies and household brands as they have adopted better practices that are sustainable. Greenpeace has tenable, lasting, and effective collaborations with innumerable companies who prefer solutions to conflicts. However, their companies such as Canada's Resolute Forest Products Company that chooses to sue Greenpeace and other forest defenders instead of collaborating.
The Power of the Marketplace
Corporations have the ability to either destroy the world's forests or help conserve them. If they introduce policies to ensure clean supply chains, set ambitious targets aimed to maximize the use of recycled wood, pulp, paper, and fiber while ensuring that any virgin fiber that is used is certified by a third party, then they would be successful in achieving ‘zero deforestation' (Assunção, Gandour " Rocha, 2015). Unfortunately, most companies haven't taken such actions, but from investigations, exposures and confrontations about environment's abuse, most companies are changing as they are starting to build solutions to protect the environment.
Standing with Indigenous Peoples
Around the world, forests have been home to indigenous people and therefore they have a right the traditional lands and the determination to defend their homes should be respected. However, most corporations and government overlook their rights and intentionally trample over the rights of the indigenous people. If major corporations and most governments stand with the people then their indigenous homes, which are the forests, will be conserved.
Conclusion
According to the history of human beings, subsistence farmers were mainly responsible for the greatest percentage of deforestation. By the 20tyh century, industrial activities and large scale-farming took over and became the main drivers of deforestation. Through the mid-2000s, the forest was cleared at a very high rate to allow for the needs such as cattle's pasture, soy farms, dams, mineral excavation and colonization projects to be met. At the same time, numerous roads were constructed through the Amazon forest. The roads opened up parts of the forests that were initially inaccessible to the settlement of poor farmers, illegal logging, and Grileiros
In Brazil, Pressure from environmentalists, satellite monitoring, private and public sectors initiatives, macroeconomic trends and increased law enforcement reversed the deforestation trend by 2004. The factors that fuelled the change were successful as there has been a decline in annual forest loss since 2004. Other countries, however, have not experienced a decline in deforestation as Brazil has.
The deforestation of the Amazon cannot be solved by any individual country, therefore integrated policies and concerted actions are essential for members of the region and beyond due to the pressures from mining, oil and gas exploration. In fact, if large corporations, governments, indigenous people together with organizations such REDD join hands to fight against deforestation and land degradation, then they will surely succeed in overcoming the negative impacts of deforestation (Assunção, Gandour " Rocha, 2015). By preserving trees, the major stakeholders will succeed at restoring the natural habitats for most animals, prevent soil erosion and potential flooding, maintain the correct humidity in the atmosphere, prevent the climate from changing negatively and conserve biodiversity.
.
References
Assunção, J., Gandour, C., " Rocha, R. (2015). Deforestation slowdown in the Brazilian Amazon: prices or policies?. Environment " Development Economics
Isadora, S. S., " Flynn, D. (2013). Amazon deforestation. Salem Press Encyclopedia,
Llopart, M., Reboita, M. S., Coppola, E., Giorgi, F., da Rocha, R. P., " de Souza, D. O. (2018). Land Use Change over the Amazon Forest and Its Impact on the Local Climate. Water
J. Shukla, a., C. Nobre, a., " P. Sellers, a. (2011). Amazon Deforestation and Climate Change. Science,
Marcovitch, J., " Pinsky, V. C. (2014). Amazon Fund: financing deforestation avoidance. Revista De Administração,
Nobre Paulo, a., Malagutti Marta, a., Urbano Domingos F., a., de Almeida Roberto A. F., a., " Giarolla Emanuel, a. (2009). Amazon Deforestation and Climate Change in a Coupled Model Simulation. Journal Of Climate
Paulo, M., Raissa, G., " Claudia, A. (2016). Achieving zero deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon: What is missing?. Elementa: Science Of The Anthropocene (2016)
Silva, D. C., Rodrigues, M., Campos, Í., " de Melo Faria, A. M. (2017). The Role of Market Institutions in Reducing Amazon Deforestation: The Case of the Soy Moratorium. Economic Analysis Of Law Review,
