The priority for the entire region is to avoid further deforestation and to expand forested areas. In the Intact Amazon, the specific challenge is to avoid deforestation while finding sustainable economic alternatives for the inhabitants, including traditional populations. In the southwest Amazon (Rondônia), large tracts of land have been abandoned since they were deforested in the late 20th century. But strengthening the economies of the areas outside the intact forest without addressing the land tenure issue may trigger further deforestation, as can be observed to the west of São Félix do Xingu in Pará.
Economic activities – most notably agriculture, mining and energy production – characterize the Anthropized Amazon. These activities have not developed to their full potential, however, largely because of long-standing problems over land tenure, reflected in deficient property records and conflicting claims, which deter greater investment in agricultural improvement.
People in the towns and cities of the Amazon, as elsewhere, rely mostly on the services sector for jobs and income. Urban areas also represent an important part of the tax base of the region, especially because agricultural and mineral commodities are typically not subject to value-added tax. In addition, urban areas have strong connections with the hinterland, mostly based on the flow of products from and the provision of services to extractive, agricultural and cattle breeding activities in the interior of the region. City residents’ family links with their original villages and towns along the rivers also play an important role in the region’s society. In the state of Amazonas, for example, city dwellers commonly spend part of the year at their properties in the interior.
Thus, successful responses to the challenges presented in each of the ‘Four Amazons’ will depend on actions taken in the other three, striking a balance between conservation goals, local expectations and economic pressures, and the physical, social and economic interconnections and interdependences between the four. To date, responses to these interrelated challenges have been shaped to a considerable extent by the history of extractivism.
History of extractivism
The current state of the Amazon is the result of a historical process focused on extracting natural riches to sell as commodities. This model, driven mostly by forces outside the region, is inadequate to lift the standard of living of most Amazonians.
During the military dictatorship in Brazil (1964–85), a development strategy that aimed to create new economic opportunities and ensure the occupation of the region (also for national security purposes) had mixed results. Large projects based on monocultures in the jungle did not prove sustainable., The Zona Franca de Manaus (ZFM – the Manaus free trade zone), created in 1957, has had some success in boosting the region’s economic development, although it promoted strong and almost unsustainable urban growth. The future of the zone is the subject of heated debate in Brazil (see Chapter Two below, under ‘Funding architecture’).
Limited regard for sustainability is still pervasive across multiple supply chains, notably in the extraction of wood and to a varying extent in the production of meat, despite the involvement of big players in the latter sector.
Since the mid-1990s, ranching and agriculture, which require less government planning than industry, have been the main source of the Amazon’s economic growth. This expansion has benefited from low levels of taxation, cheap public credit and weak enforcement of forest protection laws – and has created a flow of farmers from other regions who often fail to respect local cultures and the environment. Recent energy projects have mirrored the large mining projects, providing little in the way of tax revenue and few permanent jobs. On balance, the model has not been socially inclusive and has had a negative impact on the environment, as well as on vulnerable groups such as indigenous peoples and other traditional populations.
Informal and even illegal activities have flourished in the Amazon alongside the disordered occupation of the territory. Limited regard for sustainability is still pervasive across multiple supply chains, notably in the extraction of wood and to a varying extent in the production of meat, despite the involvement of major players in the latter sector. The consolidation of meatpackers into a handful of big names such as JBS, Marfrig and Minerva, sponsored by the government since the early 2000s with funding from the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) and including major joint ventures combining many smaller players, has only recently been translated into efforts to ensure compliance with environmental and labour standards, in the wake of pressure from international clients and investors. External pressure and support from trading companies were also instrumental in stopping the expansion of large-scale grain production in the region. There has been a high degree of compliance with the ‘soy moratorium’, which bans the purchase or export of grain planted in areas deforested in the Amazon biome after 2006.
In summary, neither the development strategy that was promoted during the military regime, based on large capital-intensive projects and the construction of highways (see Figure 3), nor the more piecemeal and disorganized occupation of the land based on beef production that has been typical since democratization has been sustainable. They have contributed to land speculation backed by extensive, low-productivity cattle ranching, and a host of informal or illegal activities, including logging and gold mining, which is conducted with great disregard for the rights of indigenous peoples and the preservation of streams and watercourses.
