RELATÓRIO LEGISLAÇÃO FLORESTAL E DE USO DA TERRA: UMA COMPARAÇÃO INTERNACIONAL ARGENTINA, BRASIL, CANADÁ, CHINA, FRANÇA, ALEMANHA E ESTADOS UNIDOS

This report by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) compares forest and land-use legislation across seven major agro-exporting countries: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, and the United States. The study specifically analyzes riparian Permanent Preservation Areas (APP) and biodiversity conservation policies to determine how the Brazilian Forest Code compares to international legal requirements. The findings indicate that Brazil maintains some of the most rigorous rules for private land protection, particularly regarding mandatory native vegetation reserves and riparian buffers, although the report emphasizes that effective implementation, monitoring, and enforcement are necessary for Brazil to achieve its environmental goals.

• Brazil possesses the most stringent rules for the protection of riparian areas (Permanent Preservation Areas or APP) on private lands compared to the other six countries studied. While other nations often allow sustainable management or agricultural activities in these zones, Brazilian law requires APP to consist of native vegetation and prohibits the economic exploitation of its forest resources.
• Brazil is the only country among those analyzed that mandates all private rural properties maintain a percentage of the land as a Legal Reserve (Reserva Legal) for biodiversity conservation without providing financial compensation to the landowner. This requirement varies from 20% to 80% of the property area depending on the region and vegetation type, with higher percentages required in the Legal Amazon.
• There are significant global variations in forest ownership and the resulting legal regimes. In Canada, forests are predominantly public, whereas in France, they are mostly private. In countries like France and Canada, public forests are subject to more restrictive legal regimes than private ones, whereas in Brazil, Forest Code rules apply regardless of whether the land is public or private.

APA

Chiavari, J., & Lopes, C. L. (2017). RELATÓRIO LEGISLAÇÃO FLORESTAL E DE USO DA TERRA: UMA COMPARAÇÃO INTERNACIONAL ARGENTINA, BRASIL, CANADÁ, CHINA, FRANÇA, ALEMANHA E ESTADOS UNIDOS. Climate Policy Initiative. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Legislacao_Florestal_e_de_Uso_da_Terra_Uma_Comparacao_Internacional_CPI.pdf

Chicago

Chiavari, Joana, and Cristina Leme Lopes. RELATÓRIO LEGISLAÇÃO FLORESTAL E DE USO DA TERRA: UMA COMPARAÇÃO INTERNACIONAL ARGENTINA, BRASIL, CANADÁ, CHINA, FRANÇA, ALEMANHA E ESTADOS UNIDOS. Climate Policy Initiative, 2017. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Legislacao_Florestal_e_de_Uso_da_Terra_Uma_Comparacao_Internacional_CPI.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Chiavari |first1=Joana |last2=Lopes |first2=Cristina Leme |title=RELATÓRIO LEGISLAÇÃO FLORESTAL E DE USO DA TERRA: UMA COMPARAÇÃO INTERNACIONAL ARGENTINA, BRASIL, CANADÁ, CHINA, FRANÇA, ALEMANHA E ESTADOS UNIDOS |publisher=Climate Policy Initiative |date=October 2017 |url=https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Legislacao_Florestal_e_de_Uso_da_Terra_Uma_Comparacao_Internacional_CPI.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{chiavari2017relatrio, author = {Chiavari, Joana and Lopes, Cristina Leme}, title = {{RELATÓRIO LEGISLAÇÃO FLORESTAL E DE USO DA TERRA: UMA COMPARAÇÃO INTERNACIONAL ARGENTINA, BRASIL, CANADÁ, CHINA, FRANÇA, ALEMANHA E ESTADOS UNIDOS}}, institution = {Climate Policy Initiative}, year = {2017}, month = oct, url = {https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Legislacao_Florestal_e_de_Uso_da_Terra_Uma_Comparacao_Internacional_CPI.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }