1

Law Regulations on Amazon Deforestation

“Every year an area of forest equal to the whole surface of the United Kingdom is

destroyed. At present rates of clearance we shall, by the year 2020, have removed 65 percent of

forests in the humid tropical zones.” (Thatcher). As humans, we create major impacts as a whole,

but we often do not fully understand how we abuse the environment for its resources. The

overuse of the environment for human necessities leads to its destruction, which is seen to be

harmful to our future. In the future, if we continue to cause harm towards the environment we

will no longer be able to obtain the positive it provides for us. These destructive issues present us

with the question what do the environmental effects of deforestation in the Amazon suggest

about a need for law regulations? Law regulations should be implemented to reduce the rate of

deforestation. This is important because the issue of deforestation has been repeatedly ignored to

the point where the number of forest areas is limited. Not only has the problem been ignored but

our attempt for solutions to this issue have not been seen to fully go into action. Many people do

not take into consideration to follow the suggested solutions simply because it disrupts the

traditional way they have been doing things or because it seems to take more care and time.

Governments should be strictly enforcing these solutions has the issue will only continue to get

worse and cause permanent damage. Law regulations such as protected areas along with private

partnerships should be made to decrease the rate of deforestation in the Amazon due to laws

preventing climate change, biodiversity loss, as well as disruption in the water cycle.

Deforestation has many impacts on the environment, one being the drastic change of the

climate in the Amazon. According to Kendra Castillo and ​Kevin Gurney​ from Department of

Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, “In the Amazon, ground temperature increase due to
 2

biophysical feedbacks is as much as 55%, and precipitation decrease up to 61%, of combined

biophysical and carbon impacts” (Castillo and ​Gurney​). Due to deforestation leading to a

reduction of rainfall, this causes an increase in surface temperature. Deforestation emits carbon

dioxide into the atmosphere, and is one of the leading causes to global warming. According to

the authors of Impacts of Climate Change and the End of Deforestation on Land Use in the

Brazilian Legal Amazon with resources from Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research,

“Brazilian government made a formal announcement within the United Nations climate treaty

framework of reducing Amazon deforestation by 80%”. Overtime regulations have been made in

order to preserve trees and reduce deforestation in the Amazon. These regulations have been

proven to show a decrease in the rate of deforestation. Studies have shown that with this decrease

in deforestation there has been a deduction in the rising temperatures as well. If law regulations

were implemented the risk of global warming due to deforestation would drastically decrease.

Authors of The End of Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon with resources from American

Association for the Advancement of Science state, “According to our analysis, these recent

developments finally make feasible the end of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, which

could result in a 2 to 5% reduction in global carbon emissions.” Developments such as the

United Nations climate treaty negotiations in 2008 of an Amazon deforestation reduction target

have been steps toward reducing deforestation problems. Although laws made have failed to be

monitored and enforced by governments, partnerships like these have been made as a solution.

This can be seen as an effective way to actually enforce deforestation laws, due to it being more

structured. Suhyun Jung from the School for Environment and Sustainability, University of

Michigan and Stephen Polasky who works at the Department of Applied Economics, University
 3

of Minnesota, have studied these partnerships and conclude that “empirical results show that the

impacts of the project were greater on smaller properties that are more likely to be

credit-constrained, and on properties initially not in compliance with Brazil's Forest Code that

faced binding constraints on deforestation” (Jung, Polasky). Studies show that private firms and

non governmental organizations lower deforestation rates in properties enrolled to the project.

This is successful due to it being a private partnership, the lenders being able to actually get their

loans reimbursed.

Deforestation can also lead to the loss in biodiversity. As said by Geldmann et al, from

the University of Cambridge who also takes part of the Conservation Science Group, “Setting

aside land for the protection of nature is a key global strategy for halting the current loss of

biodiversity” (Geldmann, et al). If we destroy less land, biodiversity will increase due to growing

habitats. Protected areas with limitations can be used in order to achieve a reduction in

biodiversity loss. With areas of forests protected from being burned and cut down, animals are

capable to reside and reproduce in that area. William Boyd, who studied at University of

Colorado Law School states, “Viewing tropical deforestation as a fundamental crisis of value,

biodiversity advocates facilitated a significant expansion in protected areas as an effort to triage

the accelerating loss of species, and motivated substantial work on valuation of and payments for

ecosystem services.” (Boyd) Protected areas create a safe place for species by reducing the

amount of threats. They also promote investments and conservation of biodiversity. Change in

conservation as well as commitment to biodiversity has been seen to improve over the years.

According to Naughton-Treves et al, with information from Gaylord Nelson Institute for

Environmental Studies along with the Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, “The remarkable
 4

physical expansion of protected areas during the past 25 years is a notable success for

conservation, and it signals an international commitment to protecting biological diversity.”

(Naughton-Treves, et al). Since the government has made investments towards these protected

areas this shows the community how biodiversity is an actual problem to be solved. Bringing the

government into these regulations and protected areas increases the chances for others to follow

and promote of reducing deforestation. Due to the government having a high position in power,

placing law and limitations on the overuse of the forests resources would be highly effective.

Reducing the amount of trees that are being cut down lead to the decrease in deforestation, which

in turn, can lead to less habitats being lost for biodiversity.

Due to deforestation there has been seen to be a severe disruption of the water in the

environment. Waters such as drinking water, fisheries, and damage to crops and irrigation

systems from erosion are all affected by the loss of water from deforestation. As said by Lucy

Bastin who studied in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, “If we include

circular buffers around point PAs, the estimated coverage of surface waters by PAs increases to

16.4% (19.8% and 15.4% for seasonal and permanent waters, respectively).” (Bastin). Marine

protected areas can be used to not only protect the land animals but also the waters. Limitations

of fishing areas results in conservation of much of the waters and fisheries in environments.

According to David Carter from the Southeast Fisheries Science Center, “Research has shown

that MPAs can, in fact, provide biological spillover benefits to the remaining fishing grounds by

protecting spawning stock biomass and genetic diversity, allowing for more natural population

structures and providing new recruits to the fishery”(Carter). Due to protected areas being able to

provide a safe environment for species, this increases their biodiversity and allows for natural
 5

population structure. With protected areas being invested in by the governments this promotes a

benefits to the society and raises costs of the land due to protection. Kim Tallaksen Halvorsen

from the Department of Natural Sciences states “By conserving a natural abundance, age and

size structure, MPAs may have positive effects on recruitment and could act as a buffer for the

eco-evolutionary effects of size-selective harvesting.” (Halvorsen). Through studies protected

areas have deemed to be effective in preserving areas of animal life and natural resources. Due to

high rates of protected areas being in use already this shows how protected areas should be

further invested in to increase the effectiveness of conservation.

Schandl et al, with resources from Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research

Organisation (CSIRO) States, “Our results support the argument that establishment is not

enough, and that investments in the PAs after their establishment are key to halting biodiversity

loss..” (Schandl et al) Studies have been made that the use of protected areas was going through

some failures. One of them being the fact that investments from the government have not been

made in order to manage these protected areas. Although these protected areas are in need of

more investments, they still have been shown to be successful at lowering deforestation and

biodiversity loss rates. Information from Jepson et al, who studied at the Smith School of

Enterprise and the Environment “PAs may be losing traction as a policy ideal is supported by

observations that some governments have backtracked on international commitments, sometimes

to the extent of ignoring their own policies and legislation” (Jepson et al). Protected areas are

vulnerable to factors such as social and political pressures. Due to this the effectiveness of

protected areas has been questioned. Although there are pressures to having protected area

framework has been made in order to support a newer generation of protected areas and
 6

financing mechanisms. As said by Margaret Thatcher, the Prime Minister of the United

Kingdom, “We must have continued economic growth in order to generate the wealth required to

pay for the protection of the environment. But it must be growth which does not plunder the

planet today and leave our children to deal with the consequences tomorrow.” (Thatcher) In

order to actually solve the problem of deforestation we must come together as a nation to have

the full effect of solutions like law regulations. Without everyone contributing to solve the issue

these implications will not work. Although past actions of law regulations have been made not

much action was actually taken in order to effectively solve or decrease deforestation.

Law regulations are key in reducing deforestation rates due to laws such as protected

areas improving climate change, biodiversity, as well as the water cycle. Deforestation has been

going on for many years and has continuously been put off. Due to this environments are

suffering and a shortage of the natural resources we rely on today are seen to be gone in the near

future. Deforestation is one of the leading causes to global warming that can impact our carbon

cycle. Since trees give off oxygen less trees would circulate more carbon dioxide into the

atmosphere. Deforestation can also lead to loss of biodiversity causing sustainability risks for all

other life forms. Another essential part of life is the clean water we use daily, which will run out

if it is not naturally recycled. Disruption in the water cycle is often due to humans causing

deforestation. Humans are not fully aware of the effects we have on the environment and think

that the issue is one to be solved in generations from now, when in reality we are already altering

how our environment works. Law regulations not only help to fix the issue of deforestation and

all the effects of deforestation but also promote others to live a better healthier life for our planet.

People in top power such as the government should be taking action to push these regulations
 7

and monitor them to ensure they are being followed correctly. If the government implemented

law regulations and put more investment into protected areas the rate of deforestation could

drastically decrease.
 8

Works cited

Bastin, Lucy, et al. “Inland Surface Waters in Protected Areas Globally: Current Coverage and

30-Year Trends.” ​Plos One,​ vol. 14, no. 1, Jan. 2019, pp. 1–17. ​Ebscohost,​

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0210496. Accessed: 22 March 2019.

Biggs, Trent Wade, et al. "Relative influence of natural watershed properties and human

disturbance on stream solute concentrations in the southwestern Brazilian Amazon

basin." ​Water Resources Research​ 38.8. Accessed: 3 March 2019.

Boyd, William. “Ways of Seeing in Environmental Law: How Deforestation Became an Object

of Climate Governance.” ​Ecology Law Quarterly,​ vol. 37, no. 3, Aug. 2010, p. 843.

Ebscohost​. Accessed: 13 March 2019

Carter, David W. "Protected areas in marine resource management: another look at the

economics and research issues." ​Ocean & Coastal Management.​ Accessed: 22 March

2019.

Castillo, Kendra C, and Gurney, Kevin Robert. “A Sensitivity Analysis of Surface Biophysical,

Carbon, and Climate Impacts of Tropical Deforestation Rates in CCSM4-CNDV*.”

Journal of Climate: ​Vol 26, No 3, 6 Feb. 2013.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236020630_A_Sensitivity_Analysis_of_Surfac

e_Biophysical_Carbon_and_Climate_Impacts_of_Tropical_Deforestation_Rates_in_CCS

M4-CNDV. Accessed: 13 March 2019.

Chakravarty, Sumit, et al. "Deforestation: causes, effects and control strategies." ​Global

perspectives on sustainable forest management.​ IntechOpen, 2012. Accessed: 13 MArch

2019.
 9

Geldmann, Jonas, et al. "A global analysis of management capacity and ecological outcomes in

terrestrial protected areas." ​Conservation Letters​. doi: 10.1111/conl.12434. 4 April 2017.

Accessed: 13 March 2019

Halvorsen, Kim Tallaksen, et al. “Impact of Harvesting Cleaner Fish for Salmonid Aquaculture

Assessed from Replicated Coastal Marine Protected Areas.” ​Marine Biology Research,​

vol. 13, no. 4, May 2017, p. 359. ​Ebscohost,​ doi:10.1080/17451000.2016.1262042.

Accessed: 22 March 2019

Jung, Suhyun, and Stephen Polasky. “Partnerships to Prevent Deforestation in the Amazon.”

Journal of Environmental Economics & Management,​ vol. 92, Nov. 2018, pp. 498–516.

Ebscohost​, doi:10.1016/j.jeem.2018.11.001. Accessed: 15 March 2019

Jepson, Paul R., et al. “Protected Area Asset Stewardship.” ​Biological Conservation​, vol. 212,

Aug. 2017, pp. 183–190. ​Ebscohost​, doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2017.03.032. Accessed: 13

March 2019

Lapola M. David, et al. “Impacts of Climate Change and the End of Deforestation on Land Use

in the Brazilian Legal Amazon.” ​Earth Interactions,​ vol. 15, no. 16, July 2011, p. 1.

Ebscohost​, doi:10.1175/2010EI333.1. Accessed: 15 March 2019

Naughton-Treves, Lisa, Margaret Buck Holland, and Katrina Brandon. "The role of protected

areas in conserving biodiversity and sustaining local livelihoods." ​Annu. Rev. Environ.​

doi: 10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.164507. Accessed: 15 March 2019

Nepstad, Daniel, et al. “The End of Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon.” ​Science,​ vol. 326,

no. 5958, Dec. 2009, p. 1350. ​Ebscohost,​ doi:10.1126/science.1182108. Accessed: 13

March 2019
 10

Thatcher, Margaret. "Speech to United Nations General Assembly (Global Environment).

"​Margaret Thatcher Foundation, Cambridge/Washington DC​ (1989). Accessed: 12

March 2019