Search Climate Insights Directory

The report analyzes the institutional framework and policies of the Brazilian agricultural sector regarding climate change. It distinguishes between mitigation and adaptation policies and evaluates whether they incorporate 'justice elements'—such as prioritizing family farming, increasing income for vulnerable producers, and promoting gender and racial equity. The mapping identifies the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (Mapa) as the primary actor, while noting a lack of a dedicated national strategy for a just transition in agriculture.

The report examines the implementation of the Brazilian Forest Code in Roraima, specifically the reduction of Legal Reserve requirements from 80% to 50% following the 2022 Ecological-Economic Zoning (ZEE-RR). It argues that this reduction, while legally permissible under certain conditions, acts as an 'invitation to deforestation' and risks setting a precedent for other Amazonian states like Amapá and Amazonas. The document highlights that approximately two million hectares in Roraima could lose legal protection, potentially releasing 267 million tonnes of carbon. It also notes that much of the state's public conservation units may lack the necessary land tenure regularization required by federal law to justify such a reduction.

The policy brief evaluates the quality and consistency of socio-environmental analyses in federal railway and highway concessions in the Legal Amazon. It finds that these studies often prioritize socio-economic and physical factors over biotic ones, fail to align with international guidelines or sectoral manuals, and frequently do not fully comply with their own terms of reference (TRs). The authors recommend incorporating international guidelines into TRs, making sectoral manuals binding, and establishing transparent approval processes to ensure full compliance.

The document argues that the rapporteur's proposal for MPV 867/2018 introduces drastic changes to Law 12.651/2012 that could paralyze environmental regularization, increase legal uncertainty, and incentivize illegal deforestation. Key concerns include shifting the responsibility for PRA adherence from landowners to state agencies, altering Legal Reserve calculations to be based on existing native vegetation rather than total property area, and creating a new legal regime for specific biomes that may not guarantee ecosystem integrity.