. New burned area datasets and top-down constraints from atmospheric concentration measurements of pyrogenic gases have decreased the large uncertainty in fire emissions estimates. However, significant gaps remain in our understanding of the contribution of deforestation, savanna, forest, agricultural waste, and peat fires to total global fire emissions. Here we used a revised version of the Carnegie-Ames-Stanford-Approach (CASA) biogeochemical model and improved satellite-derived estimates of area burned, fire activity, and plant productivity to calculate fire emissions for the 1997–2009 period on a 0.5° spatial resolution with a monthly time step. For November 2000 onwards, estimates were based on burned area, active fire detections, and plant productivity from the MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) sensor. For the partitioning we focused on the MODIS era. We used maps of burned area derived from the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) Visible and Infrared Scanner (VIRS) and Along-Track Scanning Radiometer (ATSR) active fire data prior to MODIS (1997–2000) and estimates of plant productivity derived from Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) observations during the same period. Average global fire carbon emissions according to this version 3 of the Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED3) were 2.0 Pg C year−1 with significant interannual variability during 1997–2001 (2.8 Pg C year−1 in 1998 and 1.6 Pg C year−1 in 2001). Globally, emissions during 2002–2007 were relatively constant (around 2.1 Pg C year−1) before declining in 2008 (1.7 Pg C year−1) and 2009 (1.5 Pg C year−1) partly due to lower deforestation fire emissions in South America and tropical Asia. On a regional basis, emissions were highly variable during 2002–2007 (e.g., boreal Asia, South America, and Indonesia), but these regional differences canceled out at a global level. During the MODIS era (2001–2009), most carbon emissions were from fires in grasslands and savannas (44%) with smaller contributions from tropical deforestation and degradation fires (20%), woodland fires (mostly confined to the tropics, 16%), forest fires (mostly in the extratropics, 15%), agricultural waste burning (3%), and tropical peat fires (3%). The contribution from agricultural waste fires was likely a lower bound because our approach for measuring burned area could not detect all of these relatively small fires. Total carbon emissions were on average 13% lower than in our previous (GFED2) work. For reduced trace gases such as CO and CH4, deforestation, degradation, and peat fires were more important contributors because of higher emissions of reduced trace gases per unit carbon combusted compared to savanna fires. Carbon emissions from tropical deforestation, degradation, and peatland fires were on average 0.5 Pg C year−1. The carbon emissions from these fires may not be balanced by regrowth following fire. Our results provide the first global assessment of the contribution of different sources to total global fire emissions for the past decade, and supply the community with an improved 13-year fire emissions time series.

/pdf/global-fire-emissions-and-the-contribution-of-deforestation-r24zw2ke8k.pdf

Global fire emissions and the contribution of deforestation, savanna, forest, agricultural, and peat fires (1997-2009)

The Cerrado is one of the world's biodiversity hotspots. In the last 35 years, more than 50% of its approximately 2 million km 2 has been transformed into pasture and agricultural lands planted in cash crops. The Cerrado has the richest flora among the world's savannas (>7000 species) and high levels of endemism. Species richness of birds, fishes, reptiles, amphibians, and insects is equally high, whereas mammal diversity is relatively low. Deforestation rates have been higher in the Cerrado than in the Amazon rainforest, and conservation efforts have been modest: only 2.2% of its area is under legal protection. Numerous animal and plant species are threatened with extinction, and an estimated 20% of threatened and endemic species do not occur in protected areas. Soil erosion, the degradation of the diverse Cerrado vegetation formations, and the spread of exotic grasses are widespread and major threats. The use of fire for clearing land and to encourage new growth for pasture has also caused damage, even though the Cerrado is a fire-adapted ecosystem. Ecosystem experiments and modeling show that change in land cover is altering the hydrology and affecting carbon stocks and fluxes. Cerrado agriculture is lucrative, and agricultural expansion is expected to continue, requiring improvements in and extension of the transportation infrastructure, which will affect not only the Cerrado but also the Amazon forest. Large-scale landscape modification and threats to numerous species have led to renewed interest from various sectors in promoting the conservation of the Cerrado, particularly through strengthening and enlarging the system of protected areas and improving farming practices and thus the livelihoods of local communities.

/pdf/conservation-of-the-brazilian-cerrado-514udh8nt4.pdf

Conservation of the Brazilian Cerrado

Deforestation is continuing in the Amazon basin as the cattle and soy industries expand. The main conservation policy there involves ‘protected areas’: areas designated by national governments that are left undisturbed to allow natural vegetation to develop. But this alone may not protect the rainforest ecosystem from collapse. An new estimate of forest losses made using the SimAmazonia 1 computer model suggests that by 2050, agricultural expansion will eliminate two-thirds of the forest cover of five major watersheds and ten ecoregions. One in four mammalian species examined will lose 40% of their forest habitat. Although an improved network of protected areas could avoid up to a third of projected forest loss, forest conservation on private properties will be essential if the Amazon landscapes and watersheds are to be maintained. Expansion of the cattle and soy industries in the Amazon basin has increased deforestation rates and will soon push all-weather highways into the region's core1,2,3,4. In the face of this growing pressure, a comprehensive conservation strategy for the Amazon basin should protect its watersheds, the full range of species and ecosystem diversity, and the stability of regional climates. Here we report that protected areas in the Amazon basin—the central feature of prevailing conservation approaches5,6,7,8—are an important but insufficient component of this strategy, based on policy-sensitive simulations of future deforestation. By 2050, current trends in agricultural expansion will eliminate a total of 40% of Amazon forests, including at least two-thirds of the forest cover of six major watersheds and 12 ecoregions, releasing 32 ± 8 Pg of carbon to the atmosphere. One-quarter of the 382 mammalian species examined will lose more than 40% of the forest within their Amazon ranges. Although an expanded and enforced network of protected areas could avoid as much as one-third of this projected forest loss, conservation on private lands is also essential. Expanding market pressures for sound land management and prevention of forest clearing on lands unsuitable for agriculture are critical ingredients of a strategy for comprehensive conservation3,4.

Modelling conservation in the Amazon basin

Brazil's Amazon forest remained largely intact until the "modern" era of deforestation began with the inauguration of the Transamazon Highway in 1970. Amazonian deforestation rates have trended upward since 1991, with clearing proceeding at a variable but always rapid pace. Amazonian forests are cut for various reasons, but cattle ranching predominates. The large and medium-sized ranches account for about 70% of clearing activity. Profit from beef cattle is only one of the income sources that make deforestation profitable. Forest degradation results from logging, ground fires (facilitated by logging), and the effects of fragmentation and edge formation. Degradation contributes to forest loss. The impacts of deforestation include loss of biodiversity, reduced water cycling (and rainfall), and contributions to global warming. Strategies to slow deforestation include repression through licensing procedures, monitoring and fines. The severity of penalties for deforestation needs to be sufficient to deter illegal clearing but not so great as to be inapplicable in practice. Policy reform is also needed to address root causes of deforestation, including the role of clearing in establishing land claims for both small and large actors.

http://philip.inpa.gov.br/publ_livres/Preprints/2005/Cons%20Biol-Amazon%20deforestation%20-%20FINAL.pdf

Deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia: History, Rates, and Consequences

The recent 70% decline in deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon suggests that it is possible to manage the advance of a vast agricultural frontier Enforcement of laws, interventions in soy and beef supply chains, restrictions on access to credit, and expansion of protected areas appear to have contributed to this decline, as did a decline in the demand for new deforestation The supply chain interventions that fed into this deceleration are precariously dependent on corporate risk management, and public policies have relied excessively on punitive measures Systems for delivering positive incentives for farmers to forgo deforestation have been designed but not fully implemented Territorial approaches to deforestation have been effective and could consolidate progress in slowing deforestation while providing a framework for addressing other important dimensions of sustainable development

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/344/6188/1118.full.pdf

Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy supply chains

Brazil has two major opportunities to end the clearing of its Amazon forest and to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions substantially. The first is its formal announcement within United Nations climate treaty negotiations in 2008 of an Amazon deforestation reduction target, which prompted Norway to commit $1 billion if it sustains progress toward this target ( 1 ). The second is a widespread marketplace transition within the beef and soy industries, the main drivers of deforestation, to exclude Amazon deforesters from their supply chains ( 2 ) [supplementary online material (SOM), section (§) 4]. According to our analysis, these recent developments finally make feasible the end of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, which could result in a 2 to 5% reduction in global carbon emissions. The $7 to $18 billion beyond Brazil's current budget outlays that may be needed to stop the clearing [a range intermediate to previous cost estimates ( 3 , 4 )] could be provided by the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) mechanism for compensating deforestation reduction that is under negotiation within the UN climate treaty ( 5 ), or by payments for tropical forest carbon credits under a U.S. cap-and-trade system ( 6 ).

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/326/5958/1350.full.pdf

The End of Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon

Este livro aborda as varias iniciativas adotadas em periodo mais recente e que apresentam perspectivas favoraveis ao controle do desmatamento, seja em relacao ao planejamento – como os processos de zoneamento ecologico-economico e de licenciamento ambiental de atividades rurais –, seja em relacao a legislacao – como as recentes alteracoes no Codigo Florestal – e a implantacao de unidades de conservacao ambiental. A seguir, sao analisados os diferentes tipos de fronteira agricola e as principais causas do desmatamento, apresentando-se um farto rol de recomendacoes para conte-las. Finalmente, e enfocado o emblematico caso da rodovia Cuiaba-Santarem (BR-163), cuja anunciada pavimentacao podera constituir um poderoso fator de aumento do desmatamento, se for implementada segundo os precarios padroes historicos que marcaram as iniciativas similares anteriores.

Desmatamento na Amazônia: indo além da “emergência crônica”

This study characterizes the fishermen and the commercial fishing fleet of the lower Amazon, based on data collected from 5446 boats operating out of the city of Santarem in 1997. An economic analysis of the activities of these boats was based on 50 interviews with boat operators. Larger and smaller boats use essentially the same technology, but there are significant differences in fishing strategies. Smaller boats supply local markets and their catch consists of a large variety of fish species. Larger boats tend to specialize in a small number of catfish species, and supply fish processing plants. Smaller boats are less efficient in terms of catch per unit effort (CPUE) (kg fisherman–1 day–1), but are more efficient economically, earning more for each unit of capital invested than larger boats. Most boats operating from Santarem have a storage capacity of <4 t. Boats in this size (0<4 t) account for 87% of the total fleet direct employment, and 73% of total income. Thus despite the lack of attention from regional policy makers, these smaller boats are an important source of food, income and employment in the lower Amazon region.

The commercial fisheries of the lower Amazon: an economic analysis

Co-management agreements, whereby community rules for the management of local floodplain lake fisheries are legalised and enforced by the government, have become common in the lower Amazon. Agreements are intended to limit exploitation, in particular by commercial boats, to raise stock abundance and fisheries productivity for the benefit of local subsistence-oriented fishers and for conservation. A spatially replicated observational study was carried out to evaluate the performance of fishing agreements in terms of perceived rule compliance and actual impacts on fishing activities, catch and catch per unit of effort (CPUE, a measure of fisheries productivity and proxy for stock abundance). Perceived rule compliance was high, and this was corroborated by observed changes in fishing practices. Catch per unit of effort was significantly higher (by 48% on average) in areas subject to fishing agreements than in control areas without. Most likely this effect was attributable to the effective exclusion of mobile commercial fishing boats. Household fishing effort and catch in local communities were not significantly affected by the agreements, although a tendency towards slightly higher catches at lower effort was noticeable. In conclusion, the co-management agreements have led to greater local control over resources and brought significant productivity and conservation benefits.

/pdf/fishing-agreements-in-the-lower-amazon-for-gain-and-3ewrw4vqj6.pdf

D. McGrath

Papers

The End of Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon

Desmatamento na Amazônia: indo além da “emergência crônica”

The commercial fisheries of the lower Amazon: an economic analysis

Fishing agreements in the lower Amazon: for gain and restraint

In Search of a New Approach to Fisheries Management in the Middle Amazon Region