COTA DE RESERVA AMBIENTAL: MELHOR OPÇÃO PARA COMPENSAR RESERVA LEGAL?

The document examines the Environmental Reserve Quote (CRA) established by the 2012 Forest Code (Law No. 12.651/2012) for the environmental regularization of rural properties in Brazil. It compares CRA to other compensation methods—such as registering equivalent areas, environmental easements, and donating land to Conservation Units—concluding that CRA is potentially the most advantageous for users due to lower bureaucracy and costs. However, the authors identify significant barriers to its market viability, including legal insecurity regarding the cancellation of quotes by issuers, high transaction costs from mandatory financial and notary registrations, and contradictory rules regarding small rural holdings and agrarian reform settlements. The brief provides specific recommendations for federal regulation to ensure market security and flexibility.

• Among the four legal alternatives for compensating Legal Reserve deficits, the acquisition of Environmental Reserve Quotes (CRA) is considered the most advantageous for the compensator because it does not require technical or legal assistance, does not involve purchasing or maintaining another property, and has a simpler procedure.
• The viability of the CRA market is hindered by the requirement that native vegetation must already be under a form of legal protection (such as an RPPN or environmental easement) before a quote can be issued, which acts as a barrier for owners who have excess vegetation but no prior legal designation.
• There is significant legal uncertainty regarding the ability of a property owner to reverse the expansion of a Legal Reserve after issuing a CRA, as the law does not specify procedures for reducing the reserve area if the CRA is cancelled or expires.
• The Forest Code contains contradictory rules regarding the issuance of CRAs on small rural holdings, which creates uncertainty for agrarian reform settlements where most settlers lack formal land titles.
• The legal possibility for an issuer to cancel a CRA if they decide to stop preserving the native vegetation creates a high risk for the market and legal insecurity for buyers and financial investors.
• The authors recommend that federal regulation should mandate the repurchase of the title by the issuer if they no longer wish to maintain the conserved area, or implement an equivalent alternative to ensure market security.

APA

Chiavari, J., & Leme, C. (2017). COTA DE RESERVA AMBIENTAL: MELHOR OPÇÃO PARA COMPENSAR RESERVA LEGAL? Climate Policy Initiative. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Cota-de-Reserva-Ambiental-Melhor-Opcao-para-Compensar-Reserva-Legal.pdf

Chicago

Chiavari, Joana, and Cristina Leme. COTA DE RESERVA AMBIENTAL: MELHOR OPÇÃO PARA COMPENSAR RESERVA LEGAL? Climate Policy Initiative, 2017. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Cota-de-Reserva-Ambiental-Melhor-Opcao-para-Compensar-Reserva-Legal.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Chiavari |first1=Joana |last2=Leme |first2=Cristina |title=COTA DE RESERVA AMBIENTAL: MELHOR OPÇÃO PARA COMPENSAR RESERVA LEGAL? |publisher=Climate Policy Initiative |date=July 2017 |url=https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Cota-de-Reserva-Ambiental-Melhor-Opcao-para-Compensar-Reserva-Legal.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{chiavari2017cota, author = {Chiavari, Joana and Leme, Cristina}, title = {{COTA DE RESERVA AMBIENTAL: MELHOR OPÇÃO PARA COMPENSAR RESERVA LEGAL?}}, institution = {Climate Policy Initiative}, year = {2017}, month = jul, url = {https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Cota-de-Reserva-Ambiental-Melhor-Opcao-para-Compensar-Reserva-Legal.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }