| 1. |
- Kehoe, Laura, et al.
(author)
-
Make EU trade with Brazil sustainable
- 2019
-
In: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 364:6438, s. 341-
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)
|
|
| 2. |
- Hansson, Julia, et al.
(author)
-
How is biodiversity protection influencing the potential for bioenergy feedstock production on grasslands?
- 2018
-
In: Global Change Biology Bioenergy. - : Wiley. - 1757-1693 .- 1757-1707. ; 11:3, s. 515-538
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Sustainable feedstock supply is a critical issue for the bioenergy sector. The sustainability criteria for biofuels in the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED) prohibit the use of raw material from land with high biodiversity, i.e., areas designated for nature protection purposes, primary forest and highly biodiverse grassland. This paper addresses how biodiversity considerations influence the prospects for biomass production for bioenergy on grasslands. No globally established approach exists to assess and quantify grassland availability for bioenergy while considering biodiversity. We investigate how biodiverse grasslands are considered in (i) assessments of bioenergy supply potentials; (ii) the RED, the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); and (iii) land-use governance and nature protection in Brazil. Estimates of biomass supply potentials commonly treat biodiverse grasslands as unavailable for bioenergy, when considering broader nature protection requirements. Few studies allow for a direct quantification of how biodiversity considerations relating to grasslands influence the global biomass supply potential. The definitions of natural and non-natural grassland in the RED are similar to those in the CAP. The RED complements and strengthens the protective ambitions in the CAP and CBD, but a lack of clear definitions and guidance in relation to the RED creates uncertainty about the prospects for biofuels from grasslands on the EU market. For EU-28, an estimated 39-48% (about 9-11 Mha) and 15-54% (about 10-38 Mha) of natural and non-natural grassland, respectively, may be considered highly biodiverse. In Brazil, economic-ecological zoning can be important for grassland conservation since almost half of the native grassland on private land is unprotected and subject to farmers’ preferences, which may favor protecting forest over grassland. Further clarification of grassland definitions and delineation in regulations will significantly influence the prospects for bioenergy from grasslands, and the impacts of bioenergy deployment on biodiversity.
|
|
| 3. |
- Mazzaro de Freitas, Flavio Luiz, et al.
(author)
-
Potential increase of legal deforestation in Brazilian Amazon after Forest Act revision
- 2018
-
In: Nature Sustainability. - : Springer Nature. - 2398-9629. ; 1, s. 665-670
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Brazilian Amazon rainforest is protected largely by command and control regulation of public and private land. The Brazilian Forest Act requires private landholders within the Amazon to set aside 80% of their land as legal reserves for nature protection, but this requirement can be reduced to 50% if more than 65% of a state’s territory is protected public land (for example, public conservation units and indigenous reserves). In the ongoing land designation process in Brazil, some Amazonian states may cross this 65% threshold. We assess the potential reduction in the legal reserve requirement from 80% to 50%, through spatially explicit modelling of scenarios concerning land tenure consolidation, employing up-to-date databases on land ownership. Depending on the outcome of land designation processes and political priorities, some 6.5–15.4 million hectares of private land previously protected as legal reserves may become available for legal deforestation. While protection of public land is crucial for safeguarding the Amazon, revisions of federal and state legislation may be needed to avoid the further extension of protected public land triggering increased legal deforestation on private lands. Zero-deforestation commitments and other initiatives may mitigate impacts in the absence of such revision.
|
|
| 4. |
- Sparovek, Gerd, et al.
(author)
-
Who owns Brazilian lands?
- 2019
-
In: Land use policy. - : ELSEVIER SCI LTD. - 0264-8377 .- 1873-5754. ; 87
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Land tenure in many parts of Brazil remains uncertain and controversial. These problems have recently been exacerbated by changes in the legal framework regulating protected areas and the land market. A particular challenge facing attempts to improve land tenure security and governance in Brazil is the lack of a single, integrated assessment of all types of lands. Here we address this problem and present a first, integrated map of Brazilian land tenure encompassing all official data sources pertaining to both public and private lands. Of the total (8.5 million km(2)) 36.1% of all lands are public (with 6.4% officially undesignated), 44.2% are private, and 16.6% are unregistered or with unknown tenure. Strikingly, overlaps among land tenure categories sum to 50% of the registered territory of Brazil. A clearer understanding of uncertainties in land tenure, and the spatial distribution of those uncertainties can help guide research and public policies focused on minimizing land conflicts and strengthening governance and territorial planning to improve economic, environmental and social outcomes from land use in Brazil.
|
|
