The Governance of Forests Initiative Preliminary results ... · - Federal Law 9985/2000 (national...

The Governance of Forests Initiative Preliminary results of the Brazil Assessment

Brenda Brito

Laurent Micol Priscilla Santos Alice Thuault

These draft indicators represent preliminary results of our assessments of the actors, rules and practices that govern tenure and

management of forests in Brazil. Any comments or feedback are welcome and should be sent to Brenda Brito ([email protected]) and Alice Thuault ([email protected]) .

These indicators will be incorporated into the final version of the GFI Brazil assessment by June 2010.

December 2009

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]).%20Thes

This is a working paper. Comments, suggestions and questions are welcome and should be sent to Brenda Brito ([email protected])

Forest Tenure Indicators

Forest tenure is a broad concept including forest ownership rights and other secondary rights to access, use and manage forest resources. Forest tenure shapes

the relationship between people and forests by defining who can use what resources, for how long and under what conditions. This section of the framework

considers the extent to which the legal framework for forest tenure recognizes, supports and protects a broad set of rights, with particular attention to needs of

indigenous groups and other communities who depend on forest resources for their livelihoods. We also review the effectiveness of systems for implementing

formal forest tenure systems – from the administration of privately owned land to permits, licenses, concessions and other forest contracts on public land.

However, since much forest tenure continues to operate outside of the formal system, we also try to capture the dynamic relationship between formal and

informal forest tenure, including through the effective functioning of dispute resolution mechanisms.


GOVERNANCE COMPONENTS

Actors

government institutions,

international institutions, civil

society, private sector

Rules

reform processes, policy content, law

content

Practice

implementation, administration, monitoring,

enforcement, compliance

PR

INC

IPL

ES

OF

GO

OD

GO

VE

RN

AN

CE

Transparency Land & Forest Agencies

1. Capacity administer and

monitor forest tenure

2. Capacity to negotiate and

design forest contracts

Dispute Resolution

Mechanisms

3. Capacity to resolve forest

tenure disputes

Civil society

4. Capacity to engage on forest

tenure issues

5. Representation of indigenous

and community groups

Legal Framework for

Forest Tenure

6. Recognition community and

indigenous tenure rights

7. Legal support and protection of

forest tenure

8. Transparent rules for selling

and allocating public forests

9. Clear responsibilities and

authority for forest tenure

administration

Law and Policy

Processes

10. Coordination of tenure

laws/policies with forest

management objectives

Forest Tenure Administration

11. Transparent and accessible land tenure

administration services

12. Transparent and accessible administration of

permits and licenses

13. Competitive processes for awarding major

forest contracts

14. Comprehensive design of forest contracts

Forest Tenure Monitoring

15. Comprehensive and accurate information

16. Public access to information

Community Forest Tenure

17. Recognition and resolution of community

forest tenure claims

18. Participatory community mapping

Dispute Resolution

19. Accessible and effective dispute resolution

Accountability

Participation

Coordination

Capacity


RULES

Indicator Assessment Strengths Weaknesses

FT06. Recognition community and indigenous tenure rights

Moderate

Law recognizes indigenous rights over forest lands and/or resources that they have traditionally managed Law recognizes collective forest ownership by communities, and/or adequate forest use and management rights for communities living in or dependent upon public forests

In most of the cases legal framework provides adequate space for communities to define their own internal rules for tenure administration and to develop their own mechanisms to monitor and sanction compliance with those rules. However, in some situations, communities do not have autonomy to make such decisions.

FT07. Legal support and protection of forest tenure

Moderate

In most of the situations, rights over forest land and resources are legally clear and not conflicting. However, some uncertain cases remain without a clear legal solution. In most of the cases, the legal framework provides a way to register and document the rights of all forest users, whether those rights are individually or collectively held. The main exception remains in private occupations of public land in parcels greater than 2500 hectares. Legal framework states that rights cannot be taken away or changed unilaterally and unfairly In most of the cases, legal framework establishes transparent and fair procedures to govern circumstances where it is deemed appropriate for rights to be extinguished or diminished.


However, lack of clarity is still a problem in the process of degazetting protected areas. Legal framework provides adequate protection against forced evictions, regardless of whether formal rights are held by the evictee

FT08. Transparent rules for selling and allocating public forests

Moderate

Existence of a clear legal statement that the public forest asset is held in trust for the people In most of the cases, law clearly describes what can and cannot be done with public forests, but some situations are still pending further clarification. Law defines transparent processes for allocating resource use or management rights in public forests, including a clear decision making authority and an adequate system of checks and balances In most cases law requires public disclosure of all sales of public land and allocations of resource use or management rights in public forests. However, advances are necessary in the process of selling public lands occupied by private parties.

In few cases law defines transparent processes for selling public land, including a clear decision-making authority and an adequate system of checks and balances

LAW AND POLICY PROCESSES


FT10. Coordination of tenure laws/policies with forest management objectives Weak

Little evidence that efforts were made to determine how proposed land

tenure laws and policies will impact forests and forest communities

Little evidence that the land use plan was considered when drafting land tenure laws and policies


Insufficient public participation in the policy/law formulation process, including participation of forest stakeholders Legislative debate on land tenure

laws and policies included few or no speakers with forest expertise Insufficient media coverage on the

impacts of land tenure laws and policies on forests and forest communities

FOREST TENURE ADMINISTRATION


FT13. Competitive processes for awarding major forest contracts

Strong

Calls for proposals were announced and advertised at an appropriate scale Adequate information about the forest resources

and contract that was being bid on was made available to potential contractors Process by which the contract was to be allocated

was clear and promoted transparency at all stages Clear and rational criteria for selecting the

winning contractor were advertised and adhered to All bids received were disclosed publicly,

although the full original version of the rejected bids were not disclosed Final contract awards are disclosed publicly


FT6. Recognition of multiple types of forest tenure for communities and indigenous peoples Diagnostic question: To what extent does the law recognize a breadth of different forest tenure rights for indigenous and other forest dependent communities?

Indicator description & guidance for assessment teams: Forest tenure involves a “bundle of rights” that includes the rights to access, withdraw, and manage land and resources and exclude others from

these activities. Full “ownership” of forest land typically bestows this entire bundle of rights upon the owner. It is also possible for an individual or group to possess limited

rights to manage or use forest resources on land they do not own, although these rights are secondary to ownership in terms of legal

authority. Roughly 14% of the world’s forests are privately owned. Of this, the majority is owned by individuals or firms and a smaller portion is collectively owned by

indigenous or other community groups. In the case of collective ownership, the community typically reserves the right to define their own

internal rules and procedures for tenure administration. The amount of forest under collective ownership is growing; however, many countries still do not recognize collective

ownership by communities.

The remaining 86% of the world’s forests are publicly owned by governments. These governments may bestow specific forest use or management rights to individuals,

companies or communities in the form of

concessions, licenses, permits or other contracts, which are typically defined in spatial or temporal terms. In these cases, the government maintains ownership and can revoke

the rights at any time. The level of rights granted to communities in public forests varies significantly between countries. It may include public forests administered by

government with no use rights for communities (e.g. many protected areas), public forests that are jointly managed by the government and communities (e.g. “joint forest

management), or public forests that are “reserved” for and largely managed by communities. In many cases communities living in or around public forests have no formal

tenure, but since government administration is often weak, they continue to practice informal or customary tenure systems.

Assessment Object:

Identification of all possibilities in Brazilian Legislation of recognition of tenure rights at federal and state levels

Sources of information:

Laws

- Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988

- Federal Law 6001/1973 (indigenous people statute)

- Federal Law 9985/2000 (national system of conservation units)

- Federal Law 11516/2007 (Chico Mendes Institute)

- Federal Decree 4887/2003 (Runaway-slave descendants)

Bibliography

- Roberto Palmieri e Adalberto Veríssimo. Conselhos de Unidades de Conservação. Guia sobre sua criação e seu funcionamento. Imaflora e Imazon, 2009

Elements of Quality: 1 2 3 4

Explanation: Is it adequate? Never

In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Always


Recognition of indigenous rights

over forest lands and/or resources

that they have traditionally managed X

The Federal Constitution (article 231) recognizes for indigenous people the rights over their

traditional territory (meaning, all the area they occupied permanently, explored and necessary for

the conservation of the environmental resources required to guarantee their well-being, as well as

the areas necessary to their physical and cultural reproduction in accordance to their tradition).

Such recognition must be conducted at Federal Level and it involves primarily the Indigenous

National Foundation for Indigenous People (FUNAI).

Recognition of collective forest

ownership by communities, and/or

recognition of adequate forest use

and management rights for

communities living in or dependent

upon public forests

X

Communities: There are different legal mechanisms to recognize collective forest ownership by

communities, including: (1) reserves (sustainable development – RDS- and extractive reserve –

RESEX), established by the Chico Mendes Institute at national level or by state environmental

agencies at state levels and (2) land settlements created mainly by federal, but also by some state

land agencies. At the federal level, the main categories of settlements currently created in the

Amazon region are: Sustainable development projects (PDS), Agro-extractive projects (PAE) and

Agro-Forest projects (PAF).

Communities are also allowed to live inside national and state forest. In all these situations, they

are not considered to be the owners of the land, but they are granted the right to live there and use

their resources through a contract of concession of use. Once this land right is recognized as

protected areas, the right to use forest resources must be regulated in documents called

“management plans”, produced by the environmental agency (state level) or Chico Mendes

Institute (as of 2007). For settlement projects, the land agency must produce a Plan of Use and

require environmental permits before using the natural resources.

Runaway-slave descendants: runaway-slave descendants are entitled the right to own their

territory, including all the lands necessary for their physical, social, economic, and cultural living.

Such recognition can happen at the federal or state level, depending on the jurisdiction of the

these groups’ territories.

Legal framework provides adequate

space for communities to define

their own internal rules for tenure

administration and to develop their

own mechanisms to monitor and

sanction compliance with those

rules X

Indigenous people are entitled to maintain their own organization systems and traditions.

However, the monitoring and sanction mechanisms are shared responsibilities with FUNAI

(National Foundation For Indigenous People), IBAMA and the Federal Prosecution Service

(MPF).

Communities in protected areas: Even when communities have their tenure rights recognized

through the creation of protected areas, a management plan must be elaborated to define the exact

zones for living, producing and for protection inside the protected area. Depending on the kind of

protected area created (e.g. RESEX, RDS, National Forest), the rights of communities to decide

the boundaries of such zones will vary.

For reserves (RDS and RESEX), communities can participate in deliberation councils. For

national and state forests they participate in consultative councils. The main legal difference


between these two councils to define internal rules is that the consultative councils do not have

the prerogative to decide the mechanisms of management of their territory, but only to influence

their elaboration. Therefore, in national and state forests the management plan must be approved

by the council, while in reserves the council must follow and contribute to the elaboration of the

management plan, but its final approval is made by Chico Mendes Institute (federal protected

areas) and state environmental agency (state protected areas).

In addition, the participation in the councils is not exclusive for members of the communities.

They are shared with representatives from Chico Mendes Institute or state environmental

agencies and from individuals living in the borders of their territory. Thus, even in the

deliberation councils, the decisions must be shared among all the members.

Monitoring and sanctioning mechanisms are also made through the councils.

Runaway-slave descendants: the territory of such groups is recognized as private property, thus

they have the right to define internal rules and to monitor and sanction cases of non-compliance

according to their costumes and forms of organization.

Value: 3,3 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1,6-2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong

Documentation of Research Methods

Name and organization of researcher: Brenda Brito


FT7. Legal support and protection of forest tenure Diagnostic question: To what extent does the legal framework adequately support and protect a variety of different types of forest tenure?

Indicator description & guidance for assessment teams: Mere recognition of rights is not sufficient to provide tenure security rights must also be supported and protected

under the law. For example, legal frameworks that allow for the official manifestations of rights such as property surveys and titles (or other official documents) can improve

tenure security. The law should also provide certainty that rights cannot be extinguished by the government without some form of due process and compensation. Protection

against forced evictions is particularly important for communities without formal rights who are living in public forests. For example, laws may prohibit evictions that render

individuals homeless and require all feasible alternatives to be explored prior to carrying out a forced eviction.

Assessment Object

All the possibilities of recognition of tenure rights identified in indicator 6


Law

- Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988

- Federal Law 10406/2002 (Brazilian Civil Code)

- Federal Law 9985/2000 (national system of conservation units)

- Federal Law 11284/2006 (forest concessions)

- Federal Law 11952/2009 (landholding regularization)

Bibliography

Paulo Barreto et al. Quem é dono da Amazônia? Uma análise do recadastramento de imóveis rurais. Imazon, 2008.

Brenda Brito & Paulo Barreto. The risks and the principles for landholding regularization in the Amazon. Series State of the Amazon, v 10. Imazon, Belém, 2009

Interview (Interviewer: and Alice Thuault)

Juscelino Bessa (FUNAI administrator in Belém) – September 9th

, 2009



In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Always

Rights over forest land and

resources are legally clear and not

conflicting X

It is possible to make a distinction in Brazilian legislation on the level of priority for each

category of land rights. For example, indigenous rights have priority according to the

constitution, since they are defined as original rights. The second level of priority belongs to

slave descendants rights, according to the temporary provisions of the 1988 Federal

Constitution. In third place are the rights of other traditional communities that have priority in


allocation of forests (Law 11284/2006 – Forest Concessions – and Law 11952/2009 –

landholding regularization). In fourth place are the rights of other categories of individual

occupations made before 2004 (Law 11952/2009). Nevertheless, it is also possible to identify

legal provisions that are not clear. For example, article 73, paragraph 2nd

of Law 11284/2006

allows the continuation of economic activities from 2006 to 2011 in public lands below 2500

hectares, without clarifying what kind of rights can be granted to such occupants (whether it is

a simple authorization, a rental or a possibility of further regularization). There are also

conflicts regarding possessions (simple occupations) of private parties in territories that are

later recognized as belonging to traditional communities. There is not a legal consensus in

jurisprudence on whether or not such parties are entitled to receive any compensation for the

improvements made in the areas.

Legal framework provides a way to

register and document the rights

of all forest users, whether those

rights are individually or

collectively held

X

Indigenous: Indigenous lands are documented in the Decree of demarcation of the area.

Communities: Legislation establishes ways to document land rights for communities living on

forests either individually (based on law 11952/2009) and collectively (based on law

9985/2000 for reserves and national/state forests) as well as for settlement projects.

In cases of runaway-slave descendants, the title deed is usually collective and it is granted to

an association formed by the community.

In case of reserves (RDS, RESEX), the concession of use of the land is granted in a contract of

concession of use signed by the association formed by the community members.

Private ownership: Current legislation allows the issuance of land titles for private

possessions on public lands in areas up to 1500 hectares that were occupied before December

2004. Public lands under private occupation above 1500 hectares cannot be documented before

a bidding process or even without Congressional authorization (the latter applies only to areas

above 2500 hectares). When Congressional authorization is needed, the procedures are not

very clear and there is no information at the Congress website on whether or not claims have

been presented.

Legal framework states that rights

cannot be taken away or changed

unilaterally and unfairly X

Federal constitution grants all Brazilian citizens the right to the due process of law, meaning

that they cannot be deprived from freedom or from its possessions without a proper process,

including the right of defense.

Legal framework establishes

transparent and fair procedures to

govern circumstances where it is X

Indigenous people: Indigenous lands cannot be extinct, but their use can be limited under

certain circumstances. In such cases, federal constitution establishes that all affected tribes

must be listened to before any measure form limiting their rights is taken.


deemed appropriate for rights to be

extinguished or diminished

Communities: In cases of reserves and state/national forests, although the law indicates that

the mechanism of extinction should be similar to the one that created them (for instance, law or

decree), the procedures are not the same. For example, legislation does not explicitly require

impact assessments in cases of proposals for extinction of conservation units, although they are

required for its creation. Public hearings are also not explicitly required for their extinction

(only for its creation).This lack of requirement makes the process of extinction fragile and

subjected to political interests.

Runaway-slave descendants: their lands cannot be extinct and even if they are private

(granted as collective title deed), they cannot be sold by its owners.

Private ownership: Government can decide to take private properties if they are considered to

be of social interest (meaning, they should be used for agrarian reform), of public necessity or

useful to the public in general. Some examples of the latter case are: areas of interest for

national security; useful in cases of calamities; creation or improvement of housing; for

opening roads or even for mining, use of water or to generate electricity. In all cases, the

properties can only be taken through a formal process and after the owner receives a proper

compensation.

Legal framework provides adequate

protection against forced

evictions, regardless of whether

formal rights are held by the evictee

X

Brazilian civil code provides mechanisms of judicial protection against forced evictions and

threat of forced eviction to occupants of any piece of land (even in cases of public lands) even

if they do not formally own the occupied land. For example, in case of a threat of eviction, the

land occupant can request a judicial order to avoid the eviction by a third party by imposing a

monetary sanction in case of noncompliance. In cases when the part of the area is occupied by

a third party, the judicial order can also impose a monetary sanction if the third party does not

leave it. In addition, in case of total eviction, the judicial order can also impose a sanction in

case the legitimate occupant is not allowed to return to its occupation.

Value: 3,4 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1,6-2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong




FT8. Transparent rules governing the disposal and allocation of public forests Diagnostic question: To what extent are there clear rules governing the sale and allocation of property rights in public forests?

Indicator description & guidance for assessment teams: Public forests are those owned by the government. They account for a large portion of public wealth in many countries, and should be managed

transparently and in the best interest of society. The power to sell public lands or to allocate resource use or management rights in public forests is of significant economic and

political importance and is a common source of corruption and state capture (for example illicit land swaps and corrupted concession arrangements). The regulatory framework

defining how public forests can be sold and resource rights allocated, and for what reasons, must therefore promote transparency and accountability.

Assessment Object: Legislation regarding different uses of public forest, including use by local and indigenous communities and for forest concessions.


-Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988

- Federal Laws:

- 8666/1993

- 11284/2006

- 1195/2009

- Conama rule 379/2006

Souto Maior, Ana Paula. Mineração. Available at: http://pib.socioambiental.org/pt/c/terras-indigenas/ameacas,-conflitos-e-polemicas/mineracao. Access November 26th, 2009



In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Always

Existence of a clear legal statement

that the public forest asset is held

in trust for the people X

Brazilian Federal Constitution establishes that the environment is an asset of common use, so it

can be inferred that it also includes forests assets. In addition, Federal Law 11284/2006 defines

public forests as all natural or planted forests in Brazilian territory under domain of any level

of government that are not proven to be private property. However, there is no provision

stating that public forest is held in trust for the people.

Law clearly describes what can and

cannot be done with public

forests X

Federal Law 11284/2006 establishes that public forests are all native or planted forests in all

biomes in Brazilian territory that are located under federal, state or municipality domain. This

definition includes, for instance, national parks, indigenous lands and extractive reserves.

http://pib.socioambiental.org/pt/c/terras-indigenas/ameacas,-conflitos-e-polemicas/mineracao


Different laws establish the rules for using such forests. For example, the same Federal Law

11284/2006 defines the rules for forest concessions, including provisions that grant

communities living on forest the priority over its use.

Moreover, Federal Law 9985/2000 and Decree 4340/2002 establish the rules of use in different

kinds of protected areas considered as public forests. For instance, for Biological Reserves, a

kind of protected area, any type of productive use is prohibited, since such reserves are created

for research purposes.

However, some aspects are not clarified in current legislation. For example, it is not clear if

mining is allowed in certain kinds of protected areas, such as national forests.

Regarding Indigenous lands, rules for some kinds of use have not been clarified yet. The main

example involves mining on Indigenous lands. The Federal Constitution indicates that mining

in Indigenous lands must comply with a specific regulation that has not been enacted so far. A

bill has been discussed in Congress for clarification of the specific conditions and rules for

allowing mining in such areas.

Law defines transparent processes

for selling public land, including a

clear decision-making authority and

an adequate system of checks

and balances

X

In all cases, the decision on selling belongs to the Ministry of Agrarian Development for areas

under federal jurisdiction and for the state land agencies for areas under state jurisdiction.

Federal Law 11952/2009 established that the information on the process of donating and

selling lands up to 1500 hectares occupied before December 2004 must be made available in

the Internet. Although the Federal Decree 6992/2009 requires the publication of the names of

the individuals requiring land titles and the georeferenced data of the parcels required by those

individuals, there is not any rule clarifying the periodicity of publication and whether or not the

data about the parcels will be available before the land title is issued.

The rules for allocation vary depending on the size of the area.

Up to 100 hectares: new law 11952/2009 states that such areas occupied before December

2004 can be donated to its landholders.

100 hectares to 400 hectares: new law 11952/2009 states that such areas occupied before

December 2004 can be sold under a differentiated price (which is expected to be under market

price).

400 hectares to 1500 hectares: new law 11952/2009 states that such areas occupied before

December 2004 can be sold by a price to be calculated depending on the time of occupation,

characteristics and size of the area.


1500 to 2500 hectares: These areas can only be sold through a bidding process and must

follow the rules of law 8666/1993.

Above 2500 hectares: the process for selling land above this area is not completely

transparent. Federal Constitution states that these cases have to get a previous authorization

from the Congress, but the access to information of whether or not there are any requests and

the answers to that requests is not available to the public.

Law defines transparent processes

for allocating resource use or

management rights in public forests,

including a clear decision making

authority and an adequate system of

checks and balances

X

Law 11284/2006 establishes the process for forest concessions, which must be decided by the

Brazilian Forest service in the case of forest under federal jurisdiction or by state agencies in

the case of state jurisdiction. Law 11284/2006 has as a guiding principle the free public access

to any information regarding forest concession and allocation. In addition, Rule 379/2006 from

the National Environmental Council (CONAMA) creates the system of data and information of

forest management, specifying the kind of information and periodicity of the disclosure.

Law requires public disclosure of all

sales of public land and

allocations of resource use or

management rights in public forests

X

Law 11284/2006 has as a guiding principle the free public access to any information regarding

forest concession and allocation. In addition, this law also indicates that each phase of the

bidding process must be previously disseminated with opportunity to receive public input

(including public hearing in some cases) and the result of each phase also must be made

available, primarily on the Internet. Moreover, all of the reports of assessment, monitoring and

auditing of the contracts and the management practices under the contracts must be made

available in the Internet.

Regarding the sale of public lands though donation and selling, wide transparency is not a

requirement as it is in the law of forest concessions. The federal law 11952/2009 and Decree

6992/2009 require public disclosure of some information, but do not explicitly establish

transparency throughout the allocation process. For instance, there is not a requirement for

disclosing the contracts of sales.

Value: 3,2 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1,6-2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong


Name and organization of researcher: Brenda Brito (Imazon)


FT10. Coordination of tenure laws and policies with forest management Objectives

Diagnostic question: To what extent do land tenure laws and policies take into consideration forest management objectives?

Indicator description & guidance for assessment teams: Land tenure laws and policies are typically not specific to the forest sector, but may have significant repercussions

on forests and the livelihoods of

forest-dependent communities. For example, land laws that grant ownership rights to those who clear land create perverse incentives for deforestation. The process by which

land tenure laws and policies are developed, from the land agency to the legislature, should be participatory and considerate of forest-related issues in order to improve the

overall coherence of land law with forest sector plans and objectives. To implement this indicator, pick one or two recent land tenure laws and policies as a case study.

Assessment object:

In this indicator we assessed the processes for the elaboration and discussion of Federal Law 11952/2009 and Pará State Law 7289/2009. Both of these laws aims to regulate

the process of alienation of public land to private parties.


1. Interview with the President of ITERPA (José Heder Benatti) in October 19th

, 2009.

2. Search on the Internet using Google to find register of public events to discuss the bill at federal and state level

3. http://www2.camara.gov.br/camaraFaz/ultimas-noticias/participe-de-bate-papo-com-relator-da-mp-da/?searchterm=audiência%20pública%20MP%20458 ,

access on September 12th, 2009

4. http://www.blogdobrasiliense.com.br/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1713&Itemid=1, Access on September 12th, 2009

5. http://www.aleam.gov.br/cerimonial/index_apd.asp?id=688 , Access on September 12th, 2009

6. http://www.defensoria.pa.gov.br/index.php?q=node/523, Access on September 12th, 2009

7. Media coverage:

7.1. National media: Folha de São Paulo and Estadão

a) Search at the website for any citation to “MP 458” from February 10th, 2009 to June 30th

2009 (period between the publication of the bill and its

approval) at printed and on line version.

7.2. Local Media: Portal ORM (Pará), Diário do Pará, Diário de Cuiabá

a) Search at the website for any citation to “MP 458” from February 10th, 2009 to June 30th

2009 (period between the publication of the bill and its

approval) at printed and on line version

b) Search for “regularização fundiária” for Diário de Cuiabá after no results for the previous search

http://www2.camara.gov.br/camaraFaz/ultimas-noticias/participe-de-bate-papo-com-relator-da-mp-da/?searchterm=audi%C3%AAncia%20p%C3%BAblica%20MP%20458

http://www.blogdobrasiliense.com.br/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1713&Itemid=1

http://www.aleam.gov.br/cerimonial/index_apd.asp?id=688

http://www.defensoria.pa.gov.br/index.php?q=node/523


c) Diário do Pará did not indicate any citation, probably because the searching system was not working

d) Searching at Portal ORM for “PL 384/2007”, “Lei 7284”, “Lei 7.284”, “7284” and “7.284”

Any addition information: 1 2 3 4


In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Always

Evidence that efforts were made to

determine how proposed land

tenure laws and policies will impact

forests and forest communities

(e.g. decision-makers consult

relevant experts, conduct impact

analysis, etc)

X

Federal Law: Law 11952/2009 was originated from bill 458/2009 that was classified as a

“provisional measure” (which is a bill that functions as a law for at most 120 days and needs to

be voted by the congress within this period to be converted into law. If it is not voted or if the

congress denies its enactment as a law, it cannot be enforced, but all the legal facts that

occurred under the 120 days are considered to be valid).

There was only one public hearing in the Senate on April 28th

, 2009 in which forest experts

were invited to discuss the bill impact on forests.

State Law: There is only one official register of a public hearing in March 23th, 2009 to

discuss the bill 384/2007 that originated State law 7289/2009 (search via google “PL 384/2007

Pará”). The written record of this hearing registers the presence of representatives from the

state environmental agency, but there is no indication that other experts were invited or

attended the hearing to discuss the issue.

According to interview with the President of the state land agency, the state bill was discussed

with the state environmental agency (ITERPA) and the state forest institute (IDEFLOR). Such

discussions resulted in the inclusion of environmental safeguards in the bill to guarantee that

the beneficiary of the lands has to comply with environmental rules to keep the land title.

Evidence that the land use plan was

considered when drafting land

tenure laws and policies

X

Federal Level: Law 11952/2009 does not explicitly require that land use plans from states

should be elaborated or complied with when enforcing the law, although it established that

states that do not have such plan in three years from the enactment of the law will not be able

to enter into contracts with the Federal government until they comply with it. However, even if

it is not clearly stated in the law, land use plans must be followed by every state after its

elaboration to determine the use and allocation of lands.

State Level: the legislation makes reference to the land use plan only as a requirement to

determine the obligation to recover environmental damages by the landholders. For example,

although the Forest Code determines that 80% of each property in the Amazon must be kept as

forests, this law also allows that the zoning plans can reduce this amount to 50% in certain

zones classified as zones for consolidation and occupation. In this case, if the landholder that is


applying for a land title had deforested more than the 50%, then he will have to recover up to

this amount as a condition to keep his land title.

Meaningful public participation in

the policy/law formulation

process, including participation of

forest stakeholders

X

Federal level: Because of the short time for assessment and voting of Bill 458/2009, this bill

was not fully discussed within Brazilian society, especially in the Amazon. In fact, there were

four opportunities for discussion:

- 1st: a on line chat in March 17

th, 2009 with the congressman in charge of assessing and

preparing the bill for voting in the plenary of the House of Representatives (Câmara dos

Deputados)

-2nd

: public hearing on April 3rd

, 2009 at the house of representatives of Amazonas State in

Manaus.

- 3rd

: public hearing at the senate on April 28th

, 2009 to discuss the bill, with lectures from

forest experts

- 4th

: Series of lectures in May 5th

, 2009 at the Senate during an event organized by NGOs in

defense of the Amazon forest.

State level:

There is one register of a public hearing in March 23th, 2009 to discuss the bill 384/2007 that

originated State law 7289/2009. Moreover, according to the President of the state land agency

(ITERPA), there was also another hearing in 2008, but we were unable to find any record of it.

Legislative debate on land tenure

laws and policies included speakers

with forest expertise X

Federal level: At one public hearing in the Senate on April 28th

, 2009 forest experts were

invited to discuss the bill impact on forests.

State level: At the public hearing in the State House of Representatives in March 23th, 2009,

representatives from the state environmental agency and the state forest institute were invited.

There is no register of participation of nongovernmental forest experts.

Media coverage on the impacts of

land tenure laws and policies on

forests and forest communities

X

Federal level:

Media coverage was strong at federal level, but incipient at local level (in the region that was

the most affected by the laws)

National:

- 52 citations online at national

- 39 citations in printed versions of national media

PA and MT

- 13 citations online at local media (Pará and Mato Grosso)

- 6 citations in printed versions of local media


- State level (PA): no citations in major newspaper. We were able to find only one citation at

the state official media agency talking about the passing of the bill.

Continued explanation:

Value: 2 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1,6-2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong



Any addition information:


FT13. Competitive processes for awarding major forest contracts Diagnostic question: To what extent are forest contracts awarded through a competitive and transparent process?

Indicator description & guidance for assessment teams: In awarding resource utilization or procurement contracts in public forests, governments have significant influence over forest use and management. Contract awards should

contribute to the overarching goal of maximizing short-term revenue in the context of long-term sustainable forest management. Awarding contracts based on a competitive

and transparent process can contribute to this goal by maximizing economic efficiency of production and reducing corruption risk. An common concern with regard to open

bidding processes is the loss of competitive advantage due to public disclosure of information about winning contracts. The legitimacy of this concern should be carefully

assessed in every situation and weighed against the benefits of using an open process. Whenever feasible, a competitive and open bidding process should be used.

The following are examples of common processes for awarding contracts and involve varying levels of openness and competitiveness.

--Auction: open process awarding the contract to the highest bidder, may be open bid or sealed bid auction

--Competitive negotiation: potential contractors are contacted and invited to submit proposals. Less formal than competitive bidding and requires greater negotiating skills.

--Auction-negotiation hybrid allocation: a combination of the above two systems

--Direct negotiation: only one contractor is involved and negotiates the terms of the contract with the government

This indicator should be applied to a recent contract award process of high financial significance

Assessment object: The process for granting rights for concessions and contracts for forest concessions already awarded.

This assessment was based on the case of the Jamari National Forest, which was the first case of forest concessions in Brazil. The Jamari National Forest has 220 thousand

hectares. Of this total, 96 thousand hectares were made available for concessions, divided in three units for forest management.

Altogether, 14 companies presented 19 proposals. Three different companies were selected in the end of the bidding process. The concessions in these three units will generate

R$3,8 million (U$ 2,1 million) annually.


- Federal Law 11284/2006 (Forest Concessions)

- Federal Decree 6063/2007 (Forest Concession)

- http://www.mma.gov.br/index.php?ido=conteudo.monta&idEstrutura=95&idMenu=5732, access 20/11/2009

- http://www.semarh.al.gov.br/noticias/governo-assina-primeiros-contratos-de-concessao-florestal-na-flona-de-jamari/, Access 20/11/2009

- http://www.mma.gov.br/index.php?ido=conteudo.monta&idEstrutura=95&idMenu=5732, access 20/11/2009

Elements of

Quality: 1 2 3 4

Explanation:

Is it adequate? Never

In most

cases

no

In most

cases

yes

Always

http://www.mma.gov.br/index.php?ido=conteudo.monta&idEstrutura=95&idMenu=5732

http://www.semarh.al.gov.br/noticias/governo-assina-primeiros-contratos-de-concessao-florestal-na-flona-de-jamari/



Calls for

proposals were

announced and

advertised at an

appropriate scale

X

The first case of forest concessions in Brazil happened at the Jamari National Forest (Flona Jamari) in the state

of Rondônia. Three areas of the Flona Jamari were made available for concessions. The call for proposal was

announced in November 2007 and the deadline for receiving proposals was January 9, 2008, so companies had

around 45 days to prepare all the required documents. The call for proposals was announced at the Brazilian

Forest Service website and it was replicated at several other websites that deal with environmental and forest

issues.

Adequate

information about

the forest

resources and

contract that was

being bid on was

made available to

potential

contractors

X

The website of the Brazilian Forest Service provided a considerable breadth of information about the area for

the first concession. For example, it included all of the specifications of the area, described in its Forest

Management plan; the example of the contract that would be signed by the selected company after the bidding

process; the costs that would be charged for the selected company; different kinds of forms to help companies

to design their proposals; specification of the type of wood that could be logged and others.

Process by which

the contract was

to be allocated

was clear and

promoted

transparency at

all stages

X

The process for forest concession at the Jamari National Forest was guided primarily by Law 11284/2006 and

Decree 6.063/2007 (that regulate the process of forest concessions) and Law 8666/1993 (that regulates bidding

processes). All of the stages of the bidding process were documented and made available at the Forest Service

website, including records of meetings from the c selection process and complaints made by the companies who

were not selected.

Clear and rational

criteria for

selecting the

winning

contractor were

advertised and

adhered to

X

The selection criteria for forest concessions are described in Article 26 of Law 11284/2006:

- Best price offered by the company as a payment for the concession

- Best technique, considering the following aspects:

o The smallest environmental impact

o The greatest direct social benefits

o The largest production efficiency

o The largest aggregation of value for the forest product or service in the region of the concession.

In the call for proposal, these criteria were explained and the methodology for assessing and adding value to

each of these aspects was described.


After the selection of the winner from the bidding process, the methodology of judgment of the participant was

disclosed at the Forest Service website, so anyone could understand the strengths of the winning proposal and

the weaknesses of the companies not selected.

All bids received

were disclosed

publicly

X

The full content of the bids received were not made available at the Forest Service website. However, all of the

communications from the results of the different stages of the selection explained which bids had been rejected

and selected and the reasons for such results. These communications included the names of the companies that

presented the bids.

Final contract

awards are

disclosed publicly

X

All of the final contracts with the three companies selected for the 3 areas for concessions at the Jamari National

Forest were disclosed at the website of the Brazilian Forest Service and can be viewed at


Continued explanation:

Value: 3,8 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1,6-2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong


Name and organization of researcher: Brenda Brito, Imazon


This is a working paper. Comments, suggestions and questions are welcomed and should be sent to Alice Thuault ([email protected])

Forest Management Indicators

Forest management is a central aspect of forest governance, which consists of managing and controlling the various different uses of forests, including conservation and ecological uses,

community uses, extractive uses and conversion for agriculture and infrastructure. These indicators examine the quality of the overarching regulatory framework for forests, the capacity of

forest agencies to effectively execute a range of forest management responsibilities, and the interactions and influence of civil society and private entities with the management process.

Because of the prevalence of illegal activities that affect forest management, we look closely at the effectiveness of systems for monitoring forest activities, controlling activities, and enforcing

laws. (The indicators completed are in red).

GOVERNANCE COMPONENTS

Actors (Government institutions,

international institutions, civil society,

private sector)

Rules (Reform processes, policy content, law

content)

Practice (Implementation, administration,

monitoring, enforcement, compliance)

PR

INC

IPL

ES

OF

GO

OD

GO

VE

RN

AN

CE

Transparency Forest Management

Agencies 1. Expertise

2. Independence

3. Internal performance monitoring

Law Enforcement

Bodies

4. Capacity of law enforcement

agencies

5. Capacity of the judiciary

Civil society

6. Capacity to engage on forest

management and monitoring

Legal/Policy Framework for

Forest Management

7. Clear objectives for forest management

8. Clarity and consistency within and

between laws

9. Rules for forest management and

conversion

10. Rules for protecting biodiversity

11. Policies to reduce deforestation and

degradation

12. Clear authority and responsibilities

Legal/Policy Framework for

Law Enforcement

13. Clear authority and responsibilities

14. Clearly defined offenses and penalties

Law and Policy Processes

Forest Management

21. Forest management information

system

22. Public access to information

23. Local community participation

24. Control of fire and other disturbances

25. Management of protected areas and

indigenous lands

Monitoring

26. National forest inventories

27. Forest cover change

28. Forest management and use

29. Forest product supply chain

30. Independent forest monitoring

Accountability

Participation

Coordination


Capacity

15. Coordination across sectors

16. Use of high quality information to inform

decisions

17. Public access to information on the basis

and goals of reform

18. Clear process for public participation

19. Meaningful public participation

20. High quality legislative debate on forest law

Enforcement

31. Prosecution of offenders

32. Application of penalties

I. SUMMARY

ACTORS


FM2. Independence of forest management agencies

Weak Clear codes of behavior for staff Transparent procedures for public tender

No clear criteria and transparent procedures for hiring and promotion, especially in the appointment of high officials

No requirement of disclosure of interests No transparency of salaries

RULES


FM11. Clear and comprehensive policies to reduce deforestation and degradation

Moderate

Good quality information Main drivers of deforestation and degradation addressed Clear objectives Description of the means to achieve the objectives

Lack of definition concerning financial capacity Lack of clear authority for implementation

PRACTICES


FM21. Effective information systems as a basis for forest management

Weak

Comprehensiveness of the data in information systems Centralization of information Effective information sharing mechanisms

No regular updating mechanism Lack of precision and accuracy of information Underuse of information systems, especially in Pará


FM22. Public access to information about forest management

Moderate

Comprehensiveness of the online information Useful format of accessible information Relevant language of accessible information Useful scale of accessible information

Lack of timely answer to public requests

FM23. Local community participation in forest management

Weak

Inclusion of community representatives in local forest meetings

Lack of financial or technical assistance programs Absence of adapted communication on forest related legislation Absence of communication mechanism between state and community

FM25. Effective management of protected areas and indigenous lands

Weak

Clarity as to what activities are allowed and not allowed within the area

Lack of boundary enforcement Imperfections in the delineation of boundaries Lack of access to adequate scientific and technical information Absence of comprehensive and appropriate management plan Lack of financial, human and logistical resources Absence of mechanisms to resolve disputes


II. ACTORS

FM2. Independence of forest management agencies Diagnostic question: To what extent do staffing policies of forest management agencies effectively promote independence and prevent corruption?

Indicator description & guidance for assessment teams:

Forest corruption is inherently difficult to assess due to its clandestine nature. Corruption can take many different shapes (e.g. favoritism, patronage, bribes, kick-backs) and the impacts

are significant: destruction of forests, loss of public revenues, and loss of forest access for local people. Staffing policies and codes of behavior can prevent the capture of institutions,

thus safeguarding the independence of forest management agencies.

Assessment object:

In both states of Pará and Mato Grosso, the State Environmental Agencies (SEMA- Secretaria Estadual de Meio Ambiente) and the Federal Environmental Agency (IBAMA-

Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis) are the main administrative bodies in charge of forest management.

Sources:

- Luis Barreto (Staff director- SEMA-MT) Interview 26/08/2009

- Ramiro Martins Costa (Vice-director- IBAMA-MT) Interview 26/08/2009

- Rosilene Reis (Staff director SEMA-PA) Interview 31/08/2009

- Monica Goiano (Staff department- IBAMA-PA) Interview 03/09/09

- Federal Decree nº1.171/94 on public servant code of behavior

- Federal Law nº 8.666/94 on public tender

- Federal Law n°10.410/02 on carrier of Federal Environmental Agency

- Federal Law nº 11.907/09 on carrier of Federal Environmental Agency

- Pará State Law nº 5.810/94 on public servant code of behavior

- Pará Environmental State Agency Circular nº1847/08

- Mato Grosso State Law nº 112/2002 on public servant code of behavior

- Controladoria Geral da União. (2006). Tomada de contas anual- IBAMA. Secretária Federal de Controle Interno, Brasília.

- Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Renováveis. (2008). IBAMA em Números. Brasília: IBAMA. Elements of Quality: 1 2 3 4 Explanation:

Is it adequate? Never

In most

cases

no

In most

cases

yes

Alway

s

Clear criteria and transparent

procedures for hiring and promotion,

especially in the appointment of high

officials

X

In Pará, according to data from the staff department of the State Environmental Agency (SEMA-PA),

15% of the staff has been hired without competitive selection (Cargos de confiança). Those 15% are

mainly composed of high officials, and criteria and procedures for appointment are not disclosed.

Moreover, since there is no official staffing policy, the State Environmental Agency of Pará has no

official criteria for promotion.

At the State Environmental Agency of Mato Grosso (SEMA-MT), promotions are a function of

experience, annual evaluation and level of graduation (masters or doctoral degree for instance).

Nevertheless, the agency of Mato Grosso has a significant number of positions gained by

appointment (Cargos de confiança). In 2009, according to ICV data collection, 25% of the technical

staff for licensing operations, 38% of the technical staff for monitoring activities and 67% of the

enforcement field staff were not hired through competitive selection, and many of them received the

job because of political connections Hiring, promotion or dismissal of those staff members usually do


not follow any transparent criteria.

At IBAMA, most of the staff is hired by selective processes with clear criteria and transparent

procedures. Promotions are also ruled by clear criteria established by the federal law n°10.410/02.

According to it, public servants of IBAMA receive a professional evaluation each year based on the

quality of their work, productivity, assiduity, punctuality, discipline, and years of services. The

proportion of the staff hired without selective process is around 8%, according to an evaluation report

(Controladoria Geral da União, 2006).

Requirement of disclosure of interests

(conflict of interest rules) X

No requirement of disclosure of interests has been identified either in the staffing rules of Mato

Grosso and Pará, or in the federal staffing rules.

Transparency of salaries

X

At the federal level, different categories of salaries are generally accessible in the appendix XLVII of

the federal law nº 11.907/2009. Because the information is very general and does not show high

official salaries, we considered that public staff salaries are not usually disclosed. Moreover, there is

no transparency mechanism on salaries in the State Environmental Agencies of Mato Grosso and

Pará.

Clear code of behavior for staff

X

At both the state level andfederal level, forest management agencies have a clear code of behavior for

staff. In Mato Grosso, the state law nº112/2002 established the code of behavior for public staff. In

Pará, the State environmental agency established its own code of behavior with the intern circular nº

1847 from 07/10/2008, in addition to the State Law nº5.810/94 establishing the code of behavior for

all public staff. At the federal level, a code of behavior for all public servants has been established by the federal

decree nº1171/94.

Transparent procedures for public

tender

X

The federal law nº 8.666 from 21/06/1993 established the rules for public tender. In article 3,

paragraph IV, the law states that public tender objective and procedures need to be publicly

accessible. It aims to allow a fair dispute between private companies.

Nevertheless, the same law also established some particular cases in which there is no need of

transparent public tender. For instance, transparent tender is not necessary for public purchases

between BRL 8.000 and BRL 15.000,00 when the purchase deals with engineer services (art.24).

Additionally, there have been cases of judicial disputes in processes of procurement of professional

services by environmental agencies, showing that the procedures adopted do not always comply with

the standard.

Value: 2,4 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1, 5- 2,5 Weak

2,6 - 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong


III. Rules

FM11. Clear and comprehensive policies to reduce deforestation and degradation Diagnostic question: To what extent are policies to reduce or contain deforestation and forest degradation clear and comprehensive?


Deforestation and forest degradation are complex processes that require strong political will, as well as effective planning and capacity for implementation. A structured policy is

needed with clear objectives in order to contain deforestation and degradation.

This indicator should be applied to the key national policy to reduce or contain deforestation and degradation, should such a plan exist. Assessment object:

At the federal level, two plans are structuring the implementation of policies to reduce deforestation and degradation: The Action Plan to Prevent and Control Deforestation in the

Amazon (PPCDAM- Plano de Ações para a Prevenção e o Controle do Desmatamento na Amazônia) and the National Plan on Climate Change (PNMC- Plano Nacional sobre

Mudança do Clima). The Action Plan to Prevent and Control Deforestation was launched in 2004 and finalized its first phase in 2007. As the second phase of the plan, a new version

has been prepared for the 2009-2011 period and has been published in July 2009. The National Plan on Climate Change was launched in Poznan in December 2008.

At the state level, Mato Grosso and Pará have recently established their own Action Plan to Prevent and Control Deforestation. Both were developed from stakeholder consultation

and are considered complementary to the National Action Plan.

Sources:

- Abdala, G. C., & Reis Rosa, M. (2008). PPCDAM: Avaliação 2004-2007; Revisão 2008. Brasília: MMA.

- Barreto, P., Pereira, R., & Arima, E. (2008). A pecuária e o desmatamento na Amazônia na era das mudanças climáticas. Belém: Imazon.

- Comitê Interministerial sobre Mudança do Clima. (2008). Plano Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima. Brasília: Governo federal.

- Governo do Estado de Mato Grosso. (2009). Plano de ação para controle e prevenção do desmatamento e queimadas do Estado de Mato Grosso. Cuiabá: Governo de Estado do

Mato Grosso.

- Grupo Permanente de Trabalho Interministerial. (2009). Plano de ação para prevenção e controlde do desmatamento na Amazônia Legal 2nda fase 2009-2010. Brasília: Presidência

da República.

- Grupo Permanente de Trabalho Interministerial. (2004). Plano de Ação para Prevenção e Controle do Desmatamento na Amazônia Legal. Brasília: Presidência da República.

- Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazônia. (2009, October 15). Clima em Revista. Retrieved October 28, 2009, from IPAM: http://www.ipam.org.br/revista/item/id/142

- Marquesini, M. (2008). O leão acordou: uma análise do Plano de Ação para Prevenção e Controle do Desmatamento na Amazônia Legal. São Paulo: Greenpeace.

- Millikan, B. H. (2009). Forests, public policy and governance in the Brazilian Amazon. Assessment Report to the IUCN as a contribution to the Global Forest Governance Project.

- Pará State Decree nº1.697/09 on Action plan for deforestation prevention and control and sustainable alternatives. Elements of Quality: 1 2 3 4


In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Always

Plan is based on high quality

information on deforestation and

degradation

X

The Federal Action Plan to Prevent and Control Deforestation, as well as both state plans, are based on

good quality information on deforestation dynamics. They all use PRODES deforestation data, describe

and qualify deforestation and degradation drivers, and also quote independent analyses on deforestation

tendencies. Therefore, we consider that policies to reduce deforestation and degradation are mostly based

on high quality information. Nevertheless, forest degradation information (data and analyses) is still

insufficient to inform operative action plans.

As for the National Plan on Climate Change, the information base is not adequate. This plan is based on

a 1994 emissions inventory and states that LULUCF in Brazil is responsible for around 75% of the entire

country’s CO2 emissions. This evaluation does not consider the decrease of deforestation rates after 2005


and needs to be updated.

Plan address the main drivers of

deforestation and degradation

X

In the Brazilian Amazon, dynamics of deforestation and degradation are highly influenced by extensive

cattle pasture, timber and agricultural commodities production (Barreto, Pereira, & Arima, 2008),

(Millikan, 2009). As the federal action plan to prevent and control deforestation properly stresses,

infrastructure is also a critical factor driving deforestation and degradation (Grupo Permanente de

Trabalho Interministerial, 2004, p. 27).

In order to address those drivers, the three action plans to prevent and control deforestation have

organized their actions into three categories:

i) Tenure regularization and territorial management;

ii) Monitoring and control,

iii) Sustainable production incentive.

Within this structure, deforestation and degradation are seen as consequences of weak governance and

the strategic actions described intend to fill these gaps. The first two categories aim to reinforce the

public control of the Amazon territory, clarifying tenure with the enhancement of registers, cartographic

data and zoning plans and strengthening monitoring and enforcement capacities. The third category

seeks to incentivize sustainable practices, supporting sustainable forest management, extractives

activities, enhancement of agricultural productivity and restoration of degraded areas. These three

categories are clearly directed to reduce illegality in private sectors responsible for deforestation and

degradation such as cattle-breeding, agriculture and logging.

Nevertheless, as outlined by a Greenpeace report, the infrastructure issue, considered as one factor of

deforestation and degradation, has not been addressed (Marquesini, 2008, p. 4).

Plan states clear objectives

X

The 4 plans state clear objectives.

The Federal Action Plan objective is clearly to reduce illegal deforestation in the Amazon. For the first

phase, between 2004 and 2007, the plan aimed to reduce deforestation by 20% in 3 years (Marquesini,

2008). For the next period, the objective is to achieve zero deforestation, meeting the objective of the

National Plan on Climate change announced in Poznan in 2008: a 70% reduction of deforestation by

2017 (revised to 80% by 2020) and eventually zero deforestation.

The Mato Grosso Action Plan aims to achieve 87% reduction of deforestation by 2020 (1996-2005

baseline).

The Pará Action Plan states an objective of 80% reduction deforestation by 2020 (1996-2005 baseline).

Plan states how to achieve objectives

X

The policy documents mostly state how to achieve objectives. Indeed, in the three action plans to prevent

and control deforestation, clear action strategies are described with clear activities, institutions

responsible for implementation, periods for implementation, objectives, expected results and indicators

to monitor the implementation.

Nevertheless, in the National Plan on Climate Change there is no operational description of any activities

to be implemented in order to achieve the objective of deforestation reduction. The actions described in

this plan are part of other governmental plans (the action plan to prevent and control deforestation for

instance) and there are no additional activities, no period for implementation, and no statements on

responsibilities and authority.

Plan is generally consistent with

national capacity for implementation

X

The governmental evaluation indicated that the first version of the PPCDAM (2004-2007) was partially

implemented, with only one of the three components (monitoring and control) mostly executed. The

component on tenure regularization was only partially implemented, and the activities on sustainable


production incentives had a very low implementation rate (Abdala & Reis Rosa, 2008, p. 80). The

evaluation stressed that this lack of implementation was caused in part by the lack of financial capacity

(Abdala & Reis Rosa, 2008, p. 61; 63; 71), showing a gap between the plan and the actual capacity of

implementation. Moreover, the new plan suffers from a lack of specific sources of funding: up to now

there is no specific funding line allocated for its implementation. Thus, the plan depends on the

management of the general budget of the institutions responsible for its implementation. Another option

is to apply for resources from the Amazon Fund, as suggested by the permanent workgroup formed by

different ministries (Grupo Permanente de Trabalho Interministerial, 2009, p. 70).

At the state level, the Pará action plan states that the implementation will be financed by the current

budget of the State, without any details to ensure consistent funding for implementation. The Mato

Grosso action plan does not provide any clear provision of resources for implementation.

Since the National Plan on Climate Change does not require any operational activities to be undertaken,

there are no provisions to provide national resources to implement it.

Plan identifies a clear authority for its

implementation

X

The federal action plan has set a governance structure to conduct the implementation of the plan. The

executive management is coordinated by the Casa Civil, while the Ministry of the Environment is in

charge of monitoring the activities.

While the federal plan identifies a clear authority, both State action plans fail to do so. Responsibilities

are listed for each activity, but no authority is designated for the overall plan implementation. The Mato

Grosso Action Plan has a special component for the management of the activities, with an executive

committee and a monitoring committee. Nevertheless no specific institution is identified to conduct the

implementation. The Pará State Decree only states that a work group will be implemented to establish

the management design of the plan.

As for the National Plan on Climate Change, neither authority nor responsibility is identified in order to

achieve the emission reduction.

Value: 2,8 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1, 6- 2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong


IV. Practices

FM21. Effective information systems as a basis for forest management Diagnostic question: To what extent is there a comprehensive and reliable information system in place as a basis for forest management?


Information systems can enable effective implementation of policies, inform decision making, guide forest management, and provide a powerful tool for monitoring and enforcement.

To be effective these systems must be accurate, comprehensive and accessible, and users of the system must have adequate capacity and political will to make use of the information and

data within.

We understand here as relevant spatial, financial, technical and administrative data necessary for effective forest management and enforcement, the following information :

Natural resources information (hydrography, topography, vegetal typology, forest inventory)

Territorial boundaries (title from private ownership, properties boundaries, protected areas in private areas, public protected areas, zoning plan)

Forest activities (situation of illegality of private properties, deforestation, degradation, forest fires, forestry, forest product transportation, environmental violations, environmental

restoration or compensation)

(ICV, Imazon , 2009, in preparation)

Assessment object:

In the Brazilian Amazon, forest management has been decentralized and most of the forest permits and licenses are issued by the State Environmental Agencies (Sema- Secretária Estadual

do Meio Ambiente). Therefore, state information systems are key in the implementation of forest management.

Because Mato Grosso and Pará are currently the most advanced Amazonian states in terms of decentralized forest management, we assessed here the two components of the forest

information systems used by both of these states: Simlam (Sistema Integrado de Monitoramento e Licenciamento Ambiental) and Sisflora (Sistema de Comercialização e Transporte de

Produtos Florestais).

Simlam was implemented as an environmental licensing system of rural properties (first called Slapr- Sistema de Licenciamento das Propriedades Rurais) in Mato Grosso in 2000. In

2006, the system received substantial improvements with the implementation of a system to manage forest product transactions and transportation permits. More than an information

system, it became a command-and-control instrument with the use of remote sensing technology.

The state of Pará adopted this system to manage its forests in 2006

Sources:

- Luciano (Technomapas- SEMA-MT) Interview 26/08/09

- Paula (Technomapas – SEMA-PA) Interview 01/09/09

- Maria do Carmo (Fiscalização - SEMA-PA) Interview 31/08/09

- João Almiro e Rodolfo Gadelha (Geotec- SEMA-PA) Interview 01/09/09

- Lerer, R., & Marquesini, M. (2005). A saga de uma arvore amazônica: da floresta ao mercado. São Paulo: Greenpeace.

- Thuault, A., & Micol, L. (2008). Transparência da Informação Florestal: avaliação e recomendações. Cuiabá: Instituto Centro de Vida- ICV.

- Thuault, A., Martins, H., Micol, L., & Souza Junior, C. (2009). Situação da base de informação para gestão florestal. Being prepared . Cuiabá, MT: Instituto Centro de Vida-ICV/ Imazon.

- Wertz-Kanounninkof, S. (2005). Forest policy enforcement at the Amazon frontier: the case of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Heidelberg: Ruprecht-Karls Universität.


Explanation: Is it adequate?

Nev

er

In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Alwa

ys


Information system is

comprehensive of all

existing spatial, financial,

technical and administrative

data necessary for effective

forest management and

enforcement

X

Most of the existing information necessary for forest management is gathered in Simlam and Sisflora. In both states,

the system encompasses the natural resources information (hydrography, topography, vegetal typology, forest

inventory), the territorial boundaries (title from private ownership, property boundaries, protected areas in private areas,

public protected areas, zoning plans) and forest activities (situation of illegality of private properties, deforestation,

degradation, forest fires, forestry, forest product transportation, environmental violations).

Nevertheless, there still are significant information gaps:

- In the state of Pará, the environmental violations are not directly included in the system and remain in paper

records;

- In both states, environmental restoration or compensation are not directly included in the system and remain in

paper records;

- None of the systems contain the information on tenure situation that is available at land agencies (e.g. Incra, Iterpa

and Intermat)

Moreover, considering the existing data, it is worth mentioning that some key information for forest management is

lacking. For instance, the compulsory private protected areas are not fully identified and data on degradation is not

sufficient.


systematically and regularly

updated

X

According to the type of information, the adequate frequency for updating information systems is different. For instance,

information about degradation or deforestation needs to be updated monthly in order to inform control and law

enforcement measures, while information about natural resources, such as hydrography or vegetation typology, does not

change over short periods of time. Information on infractions, forest products transactions, property boundaries, or titles

need to be automatically updated at every change.

In both states, relatively little information (information on forest fires, deforestation, forest products transactions and

transportation) is adequately updated. Additionally, for much of the data, the update remains incomplete:

- In both states, information about degradation, deforestation or restoration and reforestation is not correctly

updated for each property;

- A regular monitoring of the forest management plans is missing. Since environmental violators usually use

documentation from legal forest management plans to legalize illegal logging (Lerer & Marquesini, 2005), it is

highly necessary to have updated remote sensing and ground information on logging activities in forest

management plans and other forested areas.

- In Mato Grosso, information about environmental violations is not adequately updated. After the ground

enforcement operations, there is not enough staff capacity to enter the infractions information into the Simlam.

(Thuault, Martins, Micol, & Souza Junior, (being prepared)), (Micol, Guimarães, Mônico, & Dos Santos, 2009)


centrally maintained and is

accessible to all internal

users

X

Most of the data is centrally maintained at the State Environmental Agencies. However state forest management is based

into two distinct systems, Simlam and Sisflora, that are not integrated. Therefore, we consider that centralization of the

system is not complete.

Several negative consequences of the lack of centralization can be stressed:

- Internal users need to manually input data from one system to another;

- Not all internal users have access to all the data of the information system.

Information system allows

effective information

sharing, horizontally

(among the different actors

involved) and vertically

X

The information systems of Pará and Mato Grosso have information-sharing mechanisms available, which are shaped to

provide different types of access to the different actors, between national, sub-national and non forest actors.

In addition to the internal user access, the state information system has a specific interface for their “customers” (forest

engineers, logging industry, rural property owner, etc), in which these actors are able to provide data to the system and to

obtain certificates. Others actors, such as Ibama, the police, the federal and state prosecutors, and some NGOs such as


(among the state, federal

and local levels).

Imazon in Pará, Greenpeace and ICV in Mato Grosso have an “audit” access, in which they can overview the operations

and obtain some specific data.

Although those mechanisms do exist, few actors actually ask for a password. Moreover, the rules to obtain an audit access

are not clearly defined and opportunities for sharing information are limited. For instance, it is not possible for other forest

management institutions, such as Ibama, to add new information to the system. For instance, it could be very useful for the

State Environmental Agency to know on which property Ibama has applied an embargo (meaning, areas deforested

illegally that cannot be used for production), or where enforcement operations have been performed.

Information system data is

accurate and precise

X

The information gathered in the Simlam has numerous imprecisions and mistakes.

For instance:

- The information on hydrography has no sufficient scale to determine river courses with the necessary precision.

- The vegetation typology is not precise enough to avoid field visit to determine the applicable percentage of legal

reserve.

- The information on topography has a very generic scale

- The information on deforestation and degradation presents inconsistencies

- The information on property boundaries presents a lot of overlaps.

Information system has been

used adequately for forest

management

X

In both states, the information systems are not used optimally by the State Environmental agencies, and the potential uses

of the system, in terms of information format, information sharing mechanisms are not explored. For instance:

- In Pará State, information about monthly deforestation or degradation does not guide enforcement operations

meaning that most of the enforcement operations come from denounces or from demands from prosecutors. This

fact shows that the environmental agency does use the spatial data provided by the information system.

- In Mato Grosso, infractions are not inserted in the system in a timely manner.

- In both states, the report function of the information system is underexplored to monitor performance and to act

upon it.

- In both states, information sharing mechanisms are not optimally used, as few institutions or organizations make

use of the access to information system.

Value: 2,5 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1, 6- 2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong


FM22. Public access to information about forest management Diagnostic question: To what extent does the public have access to information about forest management?


For decision makers and society in general, the wide availability of accurate and current information about forests and forest uses is a fundamental element for good forest governance. A

significant level of transparency of forest information means information is both available and accessible.

Assessment object:

We assessed here the two components of the forest information systems of Pará and Mato Grosso States: Simlam (Sistema Integrado de Monitoramento e Licenciamento Ambiental) and

Sisflora (Sistema de Comercialização e Transporte de Produtos Florestais). (see indicator 21 for description).

In Brazil, transparency of environmental information has been established by the Federal Law 10.650/2003. This law states that all the citizens have the right to access environmental

information and that the public institutions have the duty to gather, product and disseminate environmental information. Concerning the transparency of forest sector, the resolution

n°379/06 from the National Council of Environment is an important provision, since it provides guidance on what data the Environmental agency needs to make available online.

We consider that an information is publicly available when public access is provided (over request or directly online)

Sources:

- Luciano (Technomapas- SEMA-Mt) Interview 26/08/09

- Paula (Technomapas – SEMA-Pa) Interview 01/09/09

- Thuault, A., & Micol, L. (2008). Transparência da Informação Florestal: avaliação e recomendações. Cuiabá: Instituto Centro de Vida- ICV.

- Thuault, A., Martins, H., Micol, L., & Souza Junior, C. ( Being prepared ). Situação da base de informação para gestão florestal. Cuiabá, MT: Instituto Centro de Vida-ICV/ Imazon

- Inpe. (2008). Monitoramento da cobertura florestal da Amazônia por satélites: Sistemas Prodes, Deter, Degrad e queimadas 2007-2008. São José dos Campos: Inpe.



In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Alway

s

The available online

information is comprehensive

X

Most of the existing information is accessible on the internet (www.sema.pa.gov.br , www.sema.mt.gov.br,

www.ibge.gov.br, www.inpe.br, www.ana.gov.br, www. imazongeo.org.br). The websites bring forward information

such as licenses, management plans, property boundaries, public and private protected areas, natural resources,

deforestation, degradation, and forest fires.

Nevertheless all information is not comprehensively accessible. Namely:

- Logging transaction in the Sisflora: public access is restrained to the total account of transactions.

- Environmental violations: the existing information about infractions cannot be accessed on the website of Mato

Grosso. Judgment, penalties and defense are not publicly available.

- The map of forest fires prepared by SEMA in Mato Grosso was not made available to the public.

- In Pará, infractions are not included in the information system: they remain as documental processes which

makes it very difficult for the public to access.

Information is available at a

useful scale

X

The scale of the information available for licenses, management plans, property boundaries and protected areas is

generally adequate for the needs of forest management.

Information from INPE on deforestation and forest degradation is also adequate for the current needs of forest

management: the size of the pixel of the satellite imagery used is 250 meters for alerts and 20-30 meters for annual

mapping, which makes it possible to map deforestation spots from 62,5m².

http://www.sema.pa.gov.br/

http://www.sema.mt.gov.br/

http://www.ibge.gov.br/

http://www.inpe.br/

http://www.ana.gov.br/


In addition, the data on deforestation and forest degradation disclosed monthly by Imazon is also available at an adequate

scale.

On the other hand, the hydrographic, topography and forest typology data available do not have sufficient scale for

assisting the analysis during the environmental licensing procedure. For instance, with a scale of 1:250.000, hydrographic

information doesn´t allow the identification of the protected areas located on the river side (a scale of 50:000 would be

ideal).

Information is widely

accessible to the public in

useful formats X

Most of the available information is accessible in the format of maps and records for online consultation and download.

Therefore anyone can use the files and use it for analyses.

Nevertheless, the information on licenses and management plans cannot be downloaded as data files, but merely in a pdf

format. Files are only accessible on solicitation.

Information is available in

relevant languages X

The information is available in Portuguese. In Brazil there are numerous indigenous languages, but Portuguese is

considered the only relevant language for public management purposes.

Public requests for

information are answered in a

timely fashion

X

Between September 2008 and October 2009, ICV sent sixteen requests of information to IBAMA and SEMA/MT. The

requests dealt with questions of available structure, staff and performance (i.e. simple data from the information system).

Around 43% were answered in less than a month, 6% were answered in less than 3 months and 25% in more than 3

months, and 25% were not answered. Therefore, we consider that in most of the cases information is not provided in a

timely fashion.

Value: 3 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1, 6- 2,5 Weak

2,6 - 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong


FM23. Local community participation in forest management Diagnostic question: To what extent do forest management practices promote the meaningful participation of local communities and indigenous peoples?


Involving communities in forest management is typically thought to lead to improved environmental outcomes in forests. In a small but growing number of cases, communities are

given formal ownership or management rights over forests. In these cases, communities may require some external support to improve their capacity to manage forests effectively and

comply with relevant legal requirements. Meaningful two-way communication between communities and other local stakeholders, such as the government or private companies can also

support the management process.

In cases where community ownership or use rights are not explicitly acknowledged, community participation in local forest management decisions should still be encouraged, especially

where those decisions have impacts on communities. Access to relevant information is critical to ensuring that communities have meaningful participation in those decisions.

Assessment object:

According to the Brazilian Forest Service (SFB- Serviço Florestal Brasileiro), 62% of the Brazilian public forests are occupied by forest-dependent communities.

For the purpose of this indicator, we considered community forest management as “the execution of management plan by small farmers, members of agrarian reform settlements and

traditional people or community for the achievement of economic, social or environmental benefits” (Federal decree nº 6.874/2009, art. 02).

In 2006, there were 44 community forest management plans approved and operating in the State of Pará, whereas no community forest management was officially registered in Mato

Grosso (Amaral, Amaral Neto, Nava, & Fernandez, 2007, p. 9).

The 3 potential cases where community forest management could exist according to the 2009 federal decree, are:

Sustainable Use Units

Through the conservation unit system (Snuc- Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação), different types of units allow sustainable forest management for communities:

extractive reserves (Resex – Reservas Extrativistas) , sustainable development reserves (RDS – Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável) and National or State Forest (Flonas-

Florestas Nacionais, Flotas- Florestas Estaduais). In Pará and Mato Grosso, the Environmental State Agency of Mato Grosso is responsible for the only RESEX under its

jurisdiction, while the Chico Mendes Institute (ICM- Bio- Instituto Chico Mendes) is in charge of eleven RESEX, the 2 RDS and 13 FLONA located in Pará. There are also 5

FLOTA under Pará Juridiction. Those sustainable use Units face different situations. For example, the number of families in each unit varies from 50 to 3 500 families (Source:

INCRA data base). However, they all have a very crucial aspect in common: the absence of management plans, despite the legal necessity of it.

Small farmers and Settlements

According to the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE- Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e estátisticas), there are around 86 167 smallholders families in Mato

Grosso and 196 150 in Pará. Three types of rural smallholder settlements are entitled to apply for forest management plans: Forest settlement project (PAF- Projetos de

Assentamento Florestal), agro-extractive settlement project (PAE- Projetos de Assentamento Agro-Extrativistas) and collective settlement project (PAC- Projetos de

Assentamento Coletivos). Even if there is no official data available, the number of settlements is estimated at more than 300 in Mato Grosso and more than 600 in Pará (Source:

INCRA data base) .

Indigenous territories

78 indigenous territories are located in Mato Grosso and 57 in Pará. There is no clear statement on the indigenous rights to proceed to forest management, nor is there consensus

on whether or not this activity is allowed or even should be allowed by a future legislation. For example, according to literature and sources, some authors consider that forest

management is not allowed for commercial purpose on Indigenous lands (Amaral P. H., Veríssimo, Gonçalves, & Vidal, 1998)(Amaral, Amaral Neto, Nava, & Fernandez,

2007). On the other hand, several initiatives for forest management on indigenous lands are currently underway, with support from local administration and prosecutors ( in the

Xicrins, Kanindé or Cinta Larga for instance). These examples indicate that there is no consensus on this issue (Santilli, 2000).

Controversy also exists on the future regulation of this issue. In the bill 2057/91 on the new Indigenous Statute that has been prepared through a large consultation process by

the National Council of Indigenous Policy (CNPI- Conselho Nacional de Política Indígena), forest management in indigenous territories is not allowed. In addition, even if this

statute has not yet been approved by the Congress, it has been followed by public institutions such as Funai and SFB, as explained previously.

Sources:

- Juscelino Arlindo Do Carmo Bessa (Belém Regional Executiv Administrator, FUNAI) Interview 09/09/09

- Aluísio Azanha (Funai Brasília, DASP) Interview 27/09/09

- Robert Miller (Funai Brasília, CGPIMA) Interview 09/11/09


- Paulo Amaral (Senior researcher Imazon) Interview 08/09/09

- Manual Amaral Neto (Regional Manager IEB) Interview 09/09/09

- Alexandre Milaré Batistella (Conservation Unit Coordinator Sema-MT) Interview 26/08/09

- Thiago Novaes Valente, Daniel da Costa Francez and Carlos Augusto Pantoja Ramos (administrators from Ideflor) Interview 08/09/09

- Amaral, P. H., Veríssimo, A. d., Barreto, P. G., & Vidal, E. J. (1998). Floresta para Sempre: um Manual para Produção de Madeira na Amazônia. Belém: Imazon.

- Amaral, P., & Amaral Neto, M. (2005). Manejo florestal comunitário: processos e aprendizagens na Amazônia brasileira e na América latina . Belém: Ieb/ Imazon.

- Amaral, P., Amaral Neto, M., Nava, F. R., & Fernandez, K. (2007). Manejo Florestal Comunitário na Amazônia Brasileira. Brasília: Serviço Florestal Brasileiro.

- Amaral, P., Veríssimo, T., De Souza Araújo, C., & De Souza, H. (2007). Guia para o Manejo Florestal Comunitário. Belém: Imazon.

- Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia. (2009). Censo Agropecuária 2006 Agricultura familiar. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE.

- Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis. (sem data). Histórico das oficinas de intercâmbio. Retrieved 09 06, 2009, from Iniciativas

promissoras apoiadas pelo Ibama/Promanejo: http://oficina.ipspromanejo.googlepages.com/historicodasoficinas

- Instituto Internacional de Educação do Brasil. (2006). Regularização fundiária e manejo florestal comunitário na Amazônia Brasileira. Brasília: IEB.

- Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária . (2008). Relatório de gestão Exercício 2008. Brasília: INCRA.

- Kanindé. (2008, 03 27). Manejo Florestal Comunitário. Retrieved 09 07, 2009, from Kanindé, Associação de defesa etnoambiental:

http://www.kaninde.org.br/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=56&Itemid=66

- Moreira Trovatto, C. M., Gomes, A. A., & Intini, J. M. (2008). Evolução da linha de crédito Pronaf Floresta e suas perspectivas de continuidade. Brasília: MDA.

- Palmieri, R., & Veríssimo, A. (2009). Conselhos de Unidades de Conservação: guia sobre sua criação e seu funcionamento. Piracicaba: Imaflora.

- Santana, L. G., & Peralta, A. (2009). Carteira indígena: contribuições e desáfios no combate à insegurança alimentar. III Seminário Povos indígenas e sustentabilidade (p. 14).

Campo Grande: UCDB.

- Santilli, J. (2000, abril). Exploração Florestal madeireira. Retrieved 09 07, 2009, from Instituto Socio Ambiental -ISA: http://pib.socioambiental.org/pt/c/terras-

indigenas/atividades-economicas/exploracao-florestal-madeireira

- Thuault, A. (2009). Análise da articulação das políticas públicas: o exemplo da descentralização florestal. In D. O. (coord.), Desenvolvimento Territorial Diretrizes para a região

da BR163 (pp. 173-200). Brasília: WWF.

- WWF Brasil. (2009). Efetividade de gestão das unidades de conservação no Estado de Mato grosso. Brasília: WWF Brasil.

- WWF- Brasil. (Maio de 2007). Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável: diretrizes para regulamentação. Brasília: WWF-Brasil.

- Pronaf credit from MDA: http://smap.mda.gov.br/credito/anofiscal/anofiscal.asp

- Federal decree nº 6.874/2009 on the Community forest management Program



In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Always

Extension services and/or

technical and financial

assistance programs are

provided to strengthen the

capacity of local

communities to produce

and implement forest

management plans

X

For small farmers, settlements, RESEX, RDS and Flonas, the National Agrarian Reform Institute (INCRA- Instituto

Nacional De Colonização e Reforma Agraria) has a loan program called PRONAF that grants credit terms with very low

interest rates for settlements and smallholders. The only credit line especially directed to forest management, PRONAF

Floresta, had established 5 302 contracts by 2006, but only 1,4% were in Pará (74 contracts, total amount:256.000 US$)

and 0,4% in Mato Grosso (21 contracts, total amount: less than 43.000 US$) (Moreira Trovatto, Gomes, & Intini, 2008).

Those numbers are insufficient considering the total amount of loans provided for cattle and agriculture investments for

settlements and smallholders: in 2006, 111 million US$ was loaned in Mato Grosso, and 277 million US$ in Pará (data

from http://smap.mda.gov.br/credito/anofiscal/anofiscal.asp).

Moreover, in settlements the technical assistance provided since 2003 suffers from a chronic lack of financial resources.

The 2008 national activity report from INCRA shows a cut of 70% on the global amount for technical assistance

http://oficina.ipspromanejo.googlepages.com/historicodasoficinas

http://smap.mda.gov.br/credito/anofiscal/anofiscal.asp

http://smap.mda.gov.br/credito/anofiscal/anofiscal.asp


(Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária , 2008, p. 220). At the scale of Mato Grosso, it meant that less

than 55 000 US$ was spent to provide the technical support needed to attend to more than 85 000 families.

Concerning the conservation units, Environmental Agencies have no sufficient financial and technical means to provide

technical assistance to the RESEX, RDS and Flonas. For instance, the RESEX of Mato Grosso has only 2 technicians for

1 380km². Concerning the number of technicians in the sustainable use conservation units, the RAPPAM assessment

established a score of 12% in the Flonas and 1% in the RESEX and RDS (WWF Brasil, 2009).

In some very isolated cases, assistance has effectively been provided, even at a very limited scale. For instance, it is

important to mention the work of the PPG7 in providing financial resources for punctual projects:

- Promanejo, a specific action plan for sustainable forest management included technical assistance for 7

communities (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis, no date).

- Between 1996 and 2003, 52 demonstrative projects were financed reaching USD 6 million in Mato Grosso and

Pará (data from http://www.mma.gov.br/estruturas/pda/_arquivos/Estrutura%20-%20Institucional%20-

%20Tabela%20de%20Projetos%20PDA%20Fase%20I.html).

- Since 2001, the Federal Ministry of Environment has managed two special programs for indigenous people.

Support for sustainable productive activities is one of the financed items. In Mato Grosso and Pará, 40 projects

were financed reaching more than 1,14 million US$

(data from http://www.mma.gov.br/sitio/index.php?ido=conteudo.monta&idEstrutura=24 and (Santana &

Peralta, 2009) .

In evaluating the function of this scenario, we assessed that technical or financial assistance for preparation or

implementation of forest management plans is not sufficiently provided to the communities.

Relevant forest-related

legislation is

communicated to

communities in an

understandable way

X

Despite the fact that the Federal Ministry of Environment and the State Environmental Agency have special departments

for environmental education, no specific public communication mechanism on forest-related legislation was identified.

Civil society produced some specific handbooks for communities (Amaral, Veríssimo, De Souza Araújo, & De Souza,

2007), and public institutions like the Brazilian Forest Service have tried to increase the dissemination of these

handbooks by printing extra copies. Despite this type of initiative, their circulation remains limited. Communities’

awareness of forest management plans and regulations depend mainly on the access to environmental agencies that are

primarily located far away from the communities’ areas, and on the help they receive from civil society organizations.

Local government has

hosted meetings regarding

important forest

management issues and

consistently includes

community

representatives

X

Since decentralization in Mato Grosso, numerous meetings regarding forest management issues have been held, mostly

without community representatives present. For instance, between October 2005 and March 2008, a decentralization

monitoring committee met regularly to discuss state forest management. While private stakeholders such as industry,

agribusiness federations, and environmental NGOs were committee members, community representatives never

participated directly (Thuault, 2009, p. 189).

In Pará, the involvement of community representatives in forest management meeting is much more substantial. The

Forest Institute (IDEFLOR –Instituto de Desenvolvimento Florestal do Estado do Pará) has organized meetings on

forest management with participation of community representatives. Three committees have community representatives

among their members: the State Forest Commission (COMEF- Comissão Estadual de Floresta), the extraction

commission (COMEX- Comissão Estadual de Extrativismo), and the forest technical chamber (Câmara Técnica Setorial

de Florestas). The National Council of Rubber Tappers (CNS - Conselho Nacional dos Seringueiros), the Coordination

of the Amazon indigenous organizations (COIAB- Coordenação das Organizações Indígenas da Amazônia Brasileira),

the state federation of agricultural workers (FETAGRI - Federação dos Trabalhadores na Agricultura), and the Pará

coordination of Runaway-slaves descendants association (Coordenação das Associações das Comunidades

Remanescentes de Quilombos) are taking part of the regular meetings of the three commissions.

In addition, the development of the community forest management law has been an opportunity for several local

http://www.mma.gov.br/estruturas/pda/_arquivos/Estrutura%20-%20Institucional%20-%20Tabela%20de%20Projetos%20PDA%20Fase%20I.html

http://www.mma.gov.br/estruturas/pda/_arquivos/Estrutura%20-%20Institucional%20-%20Tabela%20de%20Projetos%20PDA%20Fase%20I.html

http://www.mma.gov.br/sitio/index.php?ido=conteudo.monta&idEstrutura=24


meetings with participation of community representatives.

Because community representatives, such as members of the National Council of Rubber Tappers (CNS) and members

of the Coordination of the Amazon indigenous organizations (COIAB) are also included in federal meetings on

community forest management, we consider that in most cases, forest management meetings hosted by government have

mostly included community representatives.

Effective mechanisms

exist to promote two-way

communication about

forest management

between communities and

other relevant local

stakeholders, including

the government and

private companies

X

In the RESEX, RDS, FLONA and FLOTA, the councils of each conservation unit can be considered as specific

mechanisms to promote dialogue and communication between the relevant stakeholders. According to a recent

publication from IMAFLORA and IMAZON, the main benefits of such councils are to improve dialogue and confidence

between the managers, the local communities, the public agencies and the relevant stakeholders (Palmieri & Veríssimo,

2009). Nevertheless those councils are rather scarce.

An assessment carried out by IBAMA and WWF comprising one RDS and 43 RESEX in Brazil pointed out that only

18% of those Conservation Units do have a council (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais

Renováveis, WWF-Brasil, 2007). Of that total, 36 of these conservation units are located in the Amazon.

Moreover, the assessment recently pointed out the lack of communication mechanisms between public authorities,

managers and communities in Mato Grosso. Another study carried out by WWF-Brasil in all of the conservation units

attributes an evaluation of 18% of compliance for the item “communication with community” in the category “input”

and 10% in the item “relation with communities” in the category “results” (WWF Brasil, 2009).

For small farmers, regardless of whether they are locatedin public settlements, the formation of local associations is

considered a way to facilitate communication and access to information on community forest management.

Nevertheless, there are no special mechanisms or forums for public articulation to promote two way communications

between community associations, relevant stakeholders, private companies and government.

Concerning Indigenous peoples, communication mechanisms do exist between the National Indigenous Foundation

(FUNAI- Fundação Nacional do Indio) and the indigenous population. In addition to the regional administrations, there

are indigenous stations (PIN- Postos indígenas) and local support centers (NAL - Núcleos de Apoio Local) to allow the

two way communication. Nevertheless the local demand usually exceeds the capacities of these centers and stations.

Moreover, there is little communication between those local offices and the capital offices, and this communication

mechanism does not include any other stakeholder or private company.

Value: 2,2 Select:

1-1,5 Very Weak

1, 6- 2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong


FM25. Effective management of protected areas and indigenous lands Diagnostic question: To what extent are the protected areas and indigenous lands (or similarly classified forests) effectively managed?


Protected areas in this context include public forests that are owned by the government and managed primarily to preserve the integrity of its ecological values, although in some

protected areas limited resource use or recreation may be permitted. The management of these forests may be undertaken by the government, by communities or indigenous groups, jointly

by communities and the government, or perhaps even by a private organization. In all cases, effective management requires planning as well as adequate financial, human and technical

resources to implement the management plan. Ability to resolve conflicts is also an important aspect of managing protected areas, especially where communities or indigenous groups are

involved.

Assessment object:

In Brazil, the National System of Conservation Units (SNUC- Sistema Nacional de Unidade de conservação-) established two categories of conservation units: integral protection (i) and

sustainable use units (ii). In the sustainable use category, natural resources exploitation is allowed to a certain extent. Environmental protection areas, areas of relevant ecological interest,

extractive reserve (RESEX- Reserva Extrativista), fauna reserve and sustainable development reserve (RDS- Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável) are the six components of the

sustainable use category. Among the conservation units under integral protection, there are five categories: ecological station, biological reserve, national or state park, natural monument,

and Sylvester refuge.

According to the law nº 9.985/ 2000, all of the conservation units, with the exception of the environmental protection areas and areas of relevant ecological interest, need to be managed

with a management plan established by the responsible agency. This management plan will establish zoning of the conservation unit, the rules to use the area, and what type of natural

resources management will be done.

Brazil has no clear definition of management of indigenous land. This concept is currently being discussed in the process of construction of the National Program of Environmental

Management in Indigenous Territory (PNGATI- Programa Nacional de Gestão Ambiental em Terras Indígenas). According to the documents that have been elaborated under this

program, management of indigenous lands means environmental management according to the indigenous knowledge and practices. It includes land tenure issues and environmental

management with a specific attention “to the mechanisms, the processes, the cultural specificities of decision making, the agreement in use and the proper internal consensus of each

indigenous population” (GTI-PNGATI, 2009).

In Mato Grosso, there are 43 conservation units and 78 indigenous territories.

According to the State Environmental Agency website, Pará territory has 43 federal conservation units, 11 state conservation units and 4 municipal conservation units, covering more than

308 000 km² (http://www.sectam.pa.gov.br/interna.php?idconteudocoluna=4625) In addition, indigenous territories accounts for 720 000 km².

Sources:

- Alexandre Milaré Batistella (Conservation Unit Coordinator Sema-MT) Interview 26/08/09

- Juscelino Arlindo Do Carmo Bessa (administrador executivo regional de Belém) Interview 09/09/09

- Aluísio Azanha (Funai Brasília, DASP) Interview 27/09/09

- Robert Miller (Funai Brasília, CGPIMA) Interview 09/11/09

- Law no 9.985, 18/07/ 2000 on the National System of Conservation Units

- http://www.socioambiental.org

- Fernandes Pinto, É. (2009). Sobreposições de unidade de conservação e terras indígenas. Apresentação no GTI- PNGATI . ICM BIO.

- GTI-PNGATI. (2009). Documento de apoio para as consultas regionais.

- Hayashi, S., Souza, C., & Pereira, K. (2009, Junho). Monitoramento e desmatamento em áreas protegidas. O Estado da Amazônia , p. 8.

- Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis, WWF-Brasil. (2007). Effetividade de gestão das unidades de conservação federais no Brasil. Brasília: Ibama.

- Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade. (2009). Relatório de gestão 2008. Brasília: ICM Bio.

- Palmieri, R., & Veríssimo, A. (2009). Conselhos de Unidades de Conservação: guia sobre sua criação e seu funcionamento. Piracicaba: Imaflora.

- Santilli, J. (2000, abril). Exploração Florestal madeireira. Retrieved 09 07, 2009, from Instituto Socio Ambiental -ISA: http://pib.socioambiental.org/pt/c/terras-indigenas/atividades-

economicas/exploracao-florestal-madeireira

- WWF Brasil. (2009). Efetividade de gestão das unidades de conservação no Estado de Mato grosso. Brasília: WWF Brasil.

http://www.socioambiental.org/

This is a working paper. Comments, suggestions and questions are welcomed and should be sent to Alice Thuault ([email protected]) Elements of Quality: 1 2 3 4


In

most

cases

no

In

most

cases

yes

Always

Clear delineation of

boundaries

X

The delineation of the conservation units and indigenous territories is established by law, with a generally good level

of precision on paper. Despite this precision, a large number of problems have limited the clarity of the boundary

delineation:

- There is a great deal of overlap between the different territories. In 2009, ICMBio estimated more than 60

cases of overlapping (Fernandes Pinto, 2009)

- Although they had been created by law, most of them have not received any physical demarcation. The

delineation can also present some mistakes (for example, the case of the Cristalino State Park in Mato Grosso)

Concerning the indigenous territories, it is important to enumerate the different steps of identification established by

the federal decree n°1.775/96.

1.The process begins with an anthropological study conducted by a workgroup to identify social and ethnical

characteristics, as well as the limits of the indigenous territory.

2. After approval of the workgroup report by Funai and publication of a summary of it in the official press, there is

90 day-period for public awareness and presentation of opposition by any interested party.

3. After that, FUNAI must respond to the opposition in 60 days and send all the proceedings to federal Ministry of

Justice.

4. The Minister of Justice has 30 days to make one of the following decisions: (i) publishing a administrative order

accepting the area originally identified; (ii) ordering the compliance of additional measures to be taken in 90 days

before the final decision; (iii) disapproving the demarcation of the area, presenting solid arguments for that and

returning the proceeding to FUNAI.

5. If the administrative order is published by the Ministry of Justice, then FUNAI can start the demarcation of the

Indigenous Lands

6. The President of Brazil signs a federal decree of homologation of the demarcation

7. The indigenous land is registered in the federal patrimony services and in the local notary office.

Although today most of the indigenous lands have been legally demarcated, some territories are waiting for judicial

decision in Pará and Mato Grosso. According to the data of the Instituto SocioAmbiental (ISA), in Mato Grosso,

only 53 of the 78 indigenous lands are definitively registered. In Pará the proportion is 32 of 57 indigenous

territories. In both states, a total of 30 territories are in the process of identification, waiting for anthropological

studies, approval of FUNAI or decision of the Federal Ministry of Justice .

Enforcement of boundaries

X

The demarcation on paper does not avoid constant invasions and illegal uses of forest in their surroundings. In fact,

protected areas and indigenous lands regularly suffer from mining, deforestation and encroachment. According to the

Ibama and WWF assessment, the vulnerability of the conservation units can be estimated between 48 and 63%,

depending on the category (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis, WWF-Brasil,

2007). Moreover, an Imazon report shows that in the area of expansion of the agriculture frontier, near the BR 163

road, protected areas have been repeatedly hit by illegal deforestation (Hayashi, Souza, & Pereira, 2009).

Clarity as to what activities

are allowed and not allowed X

The National System of Conservation Units (SNUC) has established some of the activities allowed or not in each

category of conservation units, even though some specific issues such as mining in national and state forests still

This is a working paper. Comments, suggestions and questions are welcomed and should be sent to Alice Thuault ([email protected]) within the area remain to be clarified (Law n

o 9.985, 18/07/ 2000).

Regarding Indigenous lands, rules for some kinds of use have not been clarified yet. The main example involves

mining on Indigenous lands. The Federal Constitution indicates that mining in Indigenous lands must comply with a

specific regulation that has not been enacted so far. A bill has been discussed in Congress for clarification of the

specific conditions and rules for allowing mining in such areas.

Managers have access to

adequate scientific and

technical information as a

basis for forest management

planning

X

The access to adequate scientific and technical data is extremely limited. As the assessment from IBAMA and WWF

emphasized, information on impact of legal and illegal activities in the conservation unit, on key ecological issues or

on recent scientific research are lacking in order to allow a good management of the units (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio

Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis, WWF-Brasil, 2007).

At the state level (state conservation units), the need for information is significant: the WWF assessment on “research,

evaluation and monitoring” attributed a level of 13% for the existence of information in all the State conservation

units of Mato Grosso, stressing also the lack of skilled staff as an important challenge (WWF Brasil, 2009, p. 37).

Existence of a comprehensive

and appropriate management

plan

X

The federal forest agency website only has 4 management plans available. In practice, they are more numerous, but as

the Ibama and WWF outlined in their assessment of the effectiveness of federal conservation unit management,

management plans are much more exceptions than general practice. Indeed, from a sampling analysis of 116 integral

conservation units and 130 conservation units of sustainable use from all Brazil, only 28% of the ecological stations

and federal biological reserves, 30% of the national park and wild-life refuge and 24% of the national forests have a

regular management plan. In case of RESEX and RDS, none of the conservation units assessed has a management

plan. (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis, WWF-Brasil, 2007). In Mato

Grosso, according to the Rappam assessment, only 19% of the 39 conservation units evaluated effectively have a

management plan (WWF Brasil, 2009).

Access to adequate financial,

human and logistical

resources to implement the

management plan X

There are not adequate financial, human and logistical resources to manage most of the Conservation Units. The

assessment from IBAMA and WWF stressed the critical lack of human and financial resources as one of the causes of

the low implantation of conservation units (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais

Renováveis, WWF-Brasil, 2007).

The State conservation unit management is also limited by the lack of funds and human resources: the staff is

composed by 207 people. In practice it means that each employee is in charge of 141,62 km2 (WWF Brasil, 2009).

Existence of mechanisms to

resolve disputes

X

In the Resex and RDS, the councils are the specific mechanism to promote dialogue and communication between the

relevant stakeholders. According to a recent publication from Imaflora and Imazon, such councils can be useful as

dispute resolution mechanisms between the managers, the local communities, the public agencies and the relevant

stakeholders. Nevertheless, no more than 30% of the Conservation Units do have a council (Palmieri & Veríssimo,

2009).

The Chico Mendes Institute (ICM BIO) has also conducted some efforts to resolve conflicts. In the second semester of

2008, chambers of conciliation were created to find conciliatory solutions with the participation of representatives

from the institutions involved. Nevertheless, this initiative has not reached a sufficient scale to address the situation in

all conservation units (Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, 2009, p. 11)

Value:

2,2

1-1,5 Very Weak

1, 6- 2,5 Weak

2,6- 3,5 Moderate

3,6- 4 Strong

http://legislacao.planalto.gov.br/legisla/legislacao.nsf/Viw_Identificacao/lei%209.985-2000?OpenDocument


Date post:	08-Nov-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	truongkhue
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

The Governance of Forests Initiative Preliminary results ... · - Federal Law 9985/2000 (national...

Documents