SHORT-ROTATION EUCALYPT PLANTATIONS IN BRAZIL: Social Issues, Policy, Education
SHORT-ROTATION EUCALYPT PLANTATIONS IN BRAZIL: Social Issues, Policy, Education |
Short-rotation plantations are sometimes said to promote social benefits in
regions where they are located (Beattie
1975). These direct and indirect social benefits include (1) the creation
of jobs, (2) income growth, (3) flood control, (4) erosion control, (5)
watershed protection and water quality, (6) creation of recreational and
leisure activities, and (7) soil improvement. Under certain circumstances,
forest plantations are considered to be better investments than other
agricultural activities because of their low social costs (
The jobs and taxes generated and the salaries paid are some of the most easily measured benefits of the eucalypt plantations. These economic indicators have been used in most of the economic and social evaluation studies of the eucalypt plantations in Brazil (Neves 1979). An excellent example of a forest company in Brazil from which to get an idea of social and economic impact is Aracruz Celulose S.A., the largest eucalypt pulp producer in the world (2 million tons per year). In 1992 alone, Aracruz paid US$18 million in taxes to the state of Espírito Santo (where its mill is located); spent US$15 million in social investments; allocated US$14.7 million to its forest farmer program; spent US$12.5 million in its forest extension programs; invested US$600 thousand in research projects; paid US$30 million in salaries; and bought US$50 million of goods from suppliers located in the state. In 1992 alone, the company injected US$120.8 million into the economy of the state of Espírito Santo (Soresini 1993).
These economic and social benefits make the forestry sector in Brazil one
of the best alternatives for development and for contributing to the economic
and social welfare of its increasing population (
In recent years, another positive social contribution of the forest plantations has been in disposal and recycling of residues such as urban waste and organic material. The risks of applying these residues to forest plantations are lower than those presented by their application to agricultural areas (Rizzi 1993). The capacity of forest areas to renew and produce good quality water has been proven. However, several factors have to be considered with respect to disposal/recycling in these systems, such as the capacity of the area to take a certain amount of wastewater, the growth of the species, impacts on fauna and flora, and contamination of streams and groundwater.
Forestry development requires the establishment of very clear and
well-defined regulatory legislation and enforcement. Despite the existence of a
significant forest industry, it was not until the mid-20th century that
Brazilians began to establish a well-defined forest policy (
Forestry activities were established in Brazil soon after it was discovered by the Portuguese in 1500. These activities were focused on the harvesting of Brazil-wood (Cesalpinia echinata), which was one of the main economic activities at that time. However, with the development of agriculture and the cattle industry, forestry activities assumed a less important role in the Brazilian economy. This situation existed until the 1960s, when the forestry sector started to receive more attention from government.
Since the colonization period by Portugal, laws existed to protect the native forests, which were considered the property of the crown. Despite these laws, the forest along the Atlantic coast was practically destroyed by logging to provide timber and firewood or by clear-cutting to provide land for agriculture. In 1799, laws were passed to regulate the harvesting of trees, and severe penalties were given to violators. At that time, individuals guilty of setting forest fires deliberately were sentenced to death. Even with these severe penalties, deforestation of the Atlantic forest continued, so Prince Dom João IV enforced a new law requiring private land owners to preserve the forests located within a certain distance from the Atlantic Coast and along the margins of certain rivers.
The first legislation for reforestation of the Atlantic Coast forest was introduced in 1802, and in 1813 it became illegal to cut Brazil-wood. In 1825, the prohibition of cutting Brazil-wood was extended to other species but the illegal cutting of Brazil-wood, a mainstay of the Brazilian economy, continued. In 1829, cutting and burning on government forest lands had to be approved by a municipal government council. However, in 1831 things changed completely; all the laws concerning the harvesting and burning of the trees and the monopoly of the crown on the Brazil-wood and other species were removed. The rate of deforestation grew considerably, and fire was used indiscriminately to clear areas for agricultural use (Swiolko 1990). The colonial system basically was out of touch with the local social and economic situation.
The first Brazilian Forestry Code was passed in 1934 by decree 23793.
However, it was not enforced for about three decades at which time
deforestation was occurring at an incredible rate (
The 1965 version of the Brazilian Forestry Code allowed for development of
fiscal incentives for the establishment of human-made forests. This code was
the key to the growth of the Brazilian forest sector. In 1966 the federal
government passed Law 5106/66 that allowed individuals and companies to use 50%
of their income tax payment for reforestation (
Initially, the Brazilian Forestry Code provided three types of fiscal incentives for preserving native forests and establishing planted forests: (1) privately owned planted or natural forest would not be taxed, (2) income originating from natural forests or plantations would not be taxed, and (3) funds used for afforestation or reforestation would be deductible from the income tax of individuals and companies. In 1966, Law 5106/66 established the rules for tax incentives for reforestation, setting a 50% limit for deducting these expenses from total income. One problem with Law 5106/66 was that the taxpayer had to incur expenses prior to asking for the deduction.
Law 1134/70, which was passed in 1970, provided that companies could apply up to 50% of their income tax to new forest investments in projects previously approved by IBDF. Thus, for a period of time both 5106/66 and 1134/70 provided fiscal incentives for reforestation in Brazil. Law 1134/74 resulted in a boom in the forest sector of the country, and several companies specializing in reforestation emerged. However, some problems arose because of this law. Companies would receive a percentage of their taxes back but would not track the reforestation projects. This situation prevailed until 1974 when a new law, 1376/74, was passed in an attempt to correct this distortion. Law 1376/74 created the Fiscal Incentives Fund to which companies submitted funds rather than to a specific reforestation project of a particular forest company. In 1983, Law 88207/83 was passed, which established new regulations for fiscal incentives. These new regulations required the companies to anticipate the amount of money to be invested 6 months in advance when asking for rebate on their taxes. The reaction of forest companies was very negative. The Brazilian Association of Forest Companies claimed that the new legislation would bankrupt the emerging forest sector and cause unemployment.
In 1986 new legislation made additional changes in the fiscal incentives rules for reforestation, leading once again to a strong negative reaction by the forest companies. In 1987, Law 1297/87 limited tax-deduction application in reforestation to 10% and confined it to only certain areas in the states of Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo. Finally, in 1988 the fiscal incentives for reforestation were discontinued by Law 7714/88, closing a very important chapter of the development of the forestry sector in Brazil. In 1989 IBDF was dissolved by the government, and in its place the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Natural Resources (IBAMA) was created.
The recent Federal Constitution gives new treatment to forest legislation. Today, not only the federal but also the state and the municipal district can pass legislation dealing with forestry. Thus, preservation of forests, fauna, and flora have become a common responsibility of the federal, state, and municipal governments (Swiolko 1990).
For example, in the state of São Paulo companies are prohibited from using fire in any phase of establishment of plantations. In some counties of the state of Espírito Santo, the companies are not allowed to plant Eucalyptus in land not previously occupied by that genus. In fact, in the state of Espírito Santo, the forest companies are not allowed to buy land to establish eucalypt plantations. They can operate only on land that they already own and can only improve the productivity of their plantations or engage in tree farmer programs to increase the supply of wood for their mills.
Despite the fact that the Brazilian forest policy was based on fiscal incentives for establishing short-rotation monoculture plantations of exotic species, native forests still contribute substantially to the forest production of the country. In northern Brazil, native forests contribute 99.8% of the total harvest, whereas in the southeastern region, short-rotation plantations contribute 82.6% of the total. In other words, the northern states specialize in producing lumber from native forests, and the southeastern region specializes in producing other wood products from short-rotation plantations (Ribas 1990).
The current pressures exerted by the international community on countries with large areas of forest such as Brazil are leading to new actions. For example, organizations such as the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank are linking loans to an obligation by countries to consider the environmental aspects of projects for which they are seeking funds. Some European countries are refusing to import forest products from tropical countries if the products originated from unmanaged forests or from forest companies that do not comply with their specifications regarding environmental conduct (Siqueira 1990).
When eucalypt plantations displace any existing ecosystem, the relative
importance (both ecological and social) of the existing ecosystems should be
carefully balanced against the advantages to be gained (
As previously mentioned, forestry education in Brazil began in 1960, when
the National School of Forestry was founded in Viçosa, Minas Gerais, by
the federal government under the auspices of the FAO. In 1964, the National
School of Forestry was transferred to Curitiba, Paraná, and a new school
was founded by the state government in Viçosa. Fourteen years later a
graduate program was initiated at that school, which is now called the
Department of Forestry of the Federal University of Viçosa (
Among these, the school located in Viçosa, Minas Gerais, has the strongest program oriented toward eucalypt plantation and utilization. This emphasis derives from the fact that Minas Gerais has the largest area of short-rotation eucalypt plantations in Brazil. The school located in Piracicaba, São Paulo, also has a very strong eucalypt-oriented forestry program. Because most of the forest industries that use eucalypt wood as raw material are located in the southeastern region of the country, it is only logical that strong eucalypt-oriented programs be located there.
It is important to emphasize that the country's first forestry school at Viçosa was established just 34 years ago, and the first graduate program in forestry was offered there only 20 years ago. Thus, during the large-scale plantation development educational and scientific programs concerning the silvicultural and ecological aspects of the eucalypt plantations were not in existence (Reis and Reis 1993). The programs that were available were devoted to enhancing timber production alone and paid little or no attention to the impacts of the newly established plantations on the environment. This lack of a sound scientific information base coupled with (1) the misuse by some individuals and forest companies of the resources derived from fiscal incentives; (2) the failure of some eucalypt plantations, along with (3) the "exotic" characteristic of Eucalyptus in Brazil, set the framework for the current anti-eucalypts campaign in the country. It is interesting that the establishment of exotic agricultural crops such as soybeans, coffee, sugar-cane, and others has not been subjected to the same degree of criticism.
In 1967, the University of São Paulo and some forest companies signed an agreement creating the Institute for Forest Research (IPEF). Because most of the companies associated with this institute used eucalypt wood as raw material, they exerted a strong influence on the research program as well as on the graduate and undergraduate forestry programs at IBEF. A similar situation occurred in 1974 when the Federal University of Viçosa signed an agreement with several forest companies in Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo creating the Society for Forest Research (SIF). All of these companies used eucalypt either for charcoal or pulp production. Their influence on the research program and on the graduate and undergraduate forestry programs of the Federal University of Viçosa was considerable. Other universities and state research institutions conduct studies concerning eucalypts on a smaller scale but mostly focus on pine plantations and local native forests and species.
During the 1970s and 1980s, most universities course and research programs
focused on silviculture, forest management, tree breeding and improvement,
fertilization, forest protection, and wood technology (charcoal, pulp and
paper, particle boards, and essential oils). In the late 1980s and into the
1990s, the focus changed to sustainable development. Thus, subjects such as
forest planning, agroforestry, harvesting mechanization, nutrient cycling,
genetic improvement (e.g., clones and hybrids), biological control of pests and
diseases, forest legislation and policy, environmental and social impacts of
forest plantations, soil conservation, watershed management, biodiversity
conservation, and urban forestry have become very important. Both the graduate
and undergraduate programs of the schools of forestry in most of the Brazilian
universities have been modified to fit the current needs of the private sector
and government institutions as well as society as a whole. About 4600 foresters
have graduated since 1965 from the 15 universities in Brazil. Of these
graduates, 60% are working in the private sector (
Despite the considerable number of institutions, universities, companies, and organizations devoted to forest research in Brazil, a lack of coordination among them is apparent, resulting in inefficiency and dispersion of funds, labor, and equipment (Sequeira 1990). Forest research in Brazil has always tried to solve immediate problems or attend to the most urgent needs of forest companies and other forest organizations. As a result, from 1971 to 1977 research concentrated mostly on the production of wood for industrial uses (charcoal, pulp and paper, particle board). Since 1978 energy problems and greater environmental concerns have forced research and education to concentrate more on forests as a renewable energy source, the environmental impact of plantations, and new markets for the wood.