Opinion | Here’s a realistic path to protecting the

Amazon rainforest

Today, roughly 17 percent (https://research.noaa.gov/2021/07/14/deforestation-

warming-flip-part-of-amazon-forest-from-carbon-sink-to-source/?
fbclid=IwAR3vo9Qgld1N6H8ODxnhffL3olgiHtlPeqmA58yQ4xfBFyN9ELHm2YQRoZA
&itid=lk_inline_enhanced-
template#:~:text=Conversion%20of%20rainforest%20to%20agriculture,decreased%
20evaporation%20of%20water%20from) of the Amazon is gone, and more than 75
percent (https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-
environment/2022/03/07/amazon-rainforest-tipping-point-climate/?
utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=wp_news_alert_revere&loca
tion=alert&wpmk=1&wpisrc=al_environment__alert-hse--alert-
national&pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJjb29raWVuYW
1lIjoid3BfY3J0aWQiLCJpc3MiOiJDYXJ0YSIsImNvb2tpZXZhbHVlIjoiNTk2YTkyOTJh
ZGU0ZTIwZWUzNzM4MTY3IiwidGFnIjoid3BfbmV3c19hbGVydF9yZXZlcmUiLCJ1cm
wiOiJodHRwczovL3d3dy53YXNoaW5ndG9ucG9zdC5jb20vY2xpbWF0ZS1lbnZpcm9
ubWVudC8yMDIyLzAzLzA3L2FtYXpvbi1yYWluZm9yZXN0LXRpcHBpbmctcG9pbnQt
Y2xpbWF0ZS8_dXRtX3NvdXJjZT1hbGVydCZ1dG1fbWVkaXVtPWVtYWlsJnV0bV9jY
W1wYWlnbj13cF9uZXdzX2FsZXJ0X3JldmVyZSZsb2NhdGlvbj1hbGVydCZ3cG1rPTE
md3Bpc3JjPWFsX2Vudmlyb25tZW50X19hbGVydC1oc2UtLWFsZXJ0LW5hdGlvbmF
sIn0.k5WKBwfI5LNzsu32KDSFRppqaL4hJ0TldfuHl-fy6Mk&itid=lk_inline_enhanced-
template) of what remains has been weakened. As trees disappear, the Amazon’s
ability to return moisture to the atmosphere declines, leading to less rainfall, higher
temperatures and a dry forest. Unless levels of deforestation drop considerably, this
feedback loop could transform over half of the Amazon into savanna within
decades.

That loss would be felt far beyond the rainforest’s borders. The Amazon’s “flying
rivers (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/04/magazine/amazon-tipping-
point.html?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template)” — clouds of water vapor that are
transported across South America — drive precipitation in the region and are vital
for food systems (https://www.visualcapitalist.com/sp/heres-why-the-amazon-is-
so-important-for-global-food-security/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template). Moreover,
the 150 billion metric tons of carbon
(https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-is-the-amazon-so-important-for-
climate-change1/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) stored in the Amazon’s trees
and soil would be, if fully released back into the atmosphere as the forest dies,
more than a decade’s worth of global fossil fuel emissions.

The rainforest encompasses about 40 percent of South America’s land mass

(https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/14/amazon-rainforest-
deforestation/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template). Though reported deforestation
rates have fallen (https://www.npr.org/2023/07/10/1186692334/brazil-amazon-
deforestation-lula-bolsonaro?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) since the right-wing
Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro left office, protecting such a vast area against
people with strong incentives to degrade it is hard. But not impossible.

Making deforestation less lucrative

To save forests, governments need to set regulations on land use — and then
enforce them. In the case of the Amazon, much of the responsibility falls on Brazil,
which is home to approximately 60 percent of the forest and has experienced big
political swings in recent years.
 Cattle graze inside an environmentally protected area in the Amazon rainforest. (Jonne Ronz/Bloomberg News)

A working paper by economists Robin Burgess, Francisco Costa and Benjamin A.

Olken (https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2023-
09/amazon_reversal_manuscript.pdf?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) shows
those shifts affected deforestation. Drawing on satellite data along Brazil’s national
border, the researchers found that at the turn of the century the level and rate of
deforestation on the Brazilian side were significantly higher than in neighboring
countries. In 2006, as the Brazilian government implemented policies to reduce
illegal deforestation, these differences disappeared — only to return as regulations
were dismantled less than a decade later.

This means that Brazil already has a playbook to help protect the Amazon.
Punishing rule-breakers, bolstering the ranks of enforcement officers, setting
guidelines for sustainable development and conditioning credit on compliance
could all move the needle. Yet Brazil needs to do more than return to the policies of
a decade ago.

One area to target is Brazil’s heavily subsidized cattle industry

(https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2022/amazon-beef-
deforestation-brazil/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template). Some estimates suggest
that 70 percent of the Amazon’s deforested land
(https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/publication/the-economics-of-cattle-
ranching-in-the-amazon-land-grabbing-or-pushing-the-agricultural-frontier/?
itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) has been converted to pastures for cattle grazing
and ranching — all while meat producers receive tax incentives, debt forgiveness
and credit worth more than $2 billion annually
(https://news.mongabay.com/2020/05/brazilian-taxpayers-subsidizing-amazon-
clearing-cattle-ranches-study-shows/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template). Tying
these incentives to producing beef more efficiently could reduce some of the
pressures to convert forests.

Graphic showing the breakdown of land use in the Amazon. Non-forest nature is 9%, bodies of
water is 2%, natural forest is 74% and agriculture is 15%. Values are rounded.
Land cover and use in the Amazon
Non-forest

nature

Water

2%

9%

Natural forest

74%

Nearly 15%

of once-natural land is used for agriculture;

0.1% is used

in forestry.

Agriculture

15%

Data are rounded. Other non-vegetative land, such as urban areas and

mining, are 0.6 percent and are not shown.

Source: MapBiomas

Another issue is the global demand for soybeans, which are a feedstock for biofuel
production. Many governments, including those of the United States
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/doubling-down-on-the-biofuel-
boondoggle/2018/10/14/3092cd7e-ccbc-11e8-920f-dd52e1ae4570_story.html?
itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) and the European Union
(https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04133-1?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-
template), have promoted biofuel usage, ostensibly to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. In reality, biofuels are costly
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/want-a-green-new-deal-heres-a-better-
one/2019/02/24/2d7e491c-36d2-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?
itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) and inefficient
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/doubling-down-on-the-biofuel-
boondoggle/2018/10/14/3092cd7e-ccbc-11e8-920f-dd52e1ae4570_story.html?
itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template), prompting the conversion of forests into
cropland. Shifting toward strategies such as promoting efficiency, renewables
deployment and clean-energy research would help preserve a major source of land-
based carbon capture.

Policymakers around the world have also explored

(https://www.politico.eu/article/deforestation-labeling-proposal-catches-fire-
european-commission/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) eco-labels identifying
goods that were produced by illegal deforestation. But the certification system
needs to become less confusing to consumers, and key auditors
(https://www.icij.org/investigations/deforestation-inc/auditors-green-labels-
sustainability-environmental-harm/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) need to
better account for environmental damage in the production process.

Offering incentives for conservation

People don’t just need to be encouraged to scale back the chopping down of the
forest. They also need to be encouraged to save what is left. Razing forests to build
infrastructure or create more agricultural land creates income — whereas the
benefits of conservation feel more distant and less material.
 Working for a local rancher, two cowboys use a fire to clear a portion of land in the Amazon. (Alessandro Falco)

Incentives for conservation could generate greater local buy-in and contribute to
global anti-poverty goals. In Uganda, a randomized experiment by Seema
Jayachandran, a Princeton University professor and an affiliate at the Abdul Latif
Jameel Poverty Action Lab, and other researchers, found that “payments for
ecosystem services” (https://www.povertyactionlab.org/evaluation/testing-
effectiveness-payments-ecosystem-services-enhance-conservation-uganda?
itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) resulted in significantly less deforestation in
villages eligible for the program. This was also cost-effective, with the benefits to
society from delaying carbon entering the atmosphere exceeding the costs.

These types of programs are most viable in areas with high deforestation and where
there are well-defined land rights — a challenge in a region where land tenure
(https://www.economist.com/the-americas/2023/11/28/to-save-the-amazon-lula-
must-work-out-who-owns-it?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template) is often murky and
an estimated 29 percent of the Brazilian Amazon is “undesignated.” Satellite data
can make robust monitoring viable at scale. Similar contracts could also be made
with Indigenous groups, supporting their stewardship of the forest
(https://news.mongabay.com/2020/08/indigenous-best-amazon-stewards-but-only-
when-property-rights-assured-study/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template).
Leaders of the Tenharim Indigenous group show the vulnerable borders of their land on a large map. Agribusiness is
encroaching into their territory near Humaitá, Brazil. (Alessandro Falco)

In a related, though slightly different, approach, governments could offer incentives

to landowners for improving capacity and output on existing cropland.
Performance-based funding, a method that initiatives such as Brazil’s Amazon Fund
(https://www.fundoamazonia.gov.br/pt/home/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template)
already employ, would ensure communities can still farm, but in a way that
generates more with less. Targeted restoration projects of key degraded lands also
have potential.

Of course, all of this would require consistent funding — from regional governments
as well as foreign partners. Developed countries benefit from the Amazon’s
environmental impact and should contribute to its protection via climate finance
agreements. Private capital should also play a role: Princeton’s Tim Searchinger
points out that this is especially true of the aviation and maritime sectors, which are
under pressure to reduce emissions but struggle with the exorbitant costs of
switching fuels within their industries. Airlines and shippers could help preserve the
Amazon to offset the emissions they are likely to produce in coming decades. This
would require a transparent, trusted mechanism to ensure public and private
funding are going toward conservation, rather than scam environmental projects or
ecological initiatives that would have happened anyway.

There is, in other words, reason to hope the Amazon can be saved — in a way that
doesn’t suppress development but instead reinvigorates the region for decades to
come. It won’t be easy. But it’s not impossible.