Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines a pilot energy efficiency (EE) auction in Boa Vista, Roraima, proposed by ANEEL. It identifies risks such as the 'winner's curse' due to the closed-envelope format and potential measurement and verification (M&V) errors using the difference-in-differences method. The authors argue that Roraima's unique energy situation—being isolated from the National Interconnected System (SIN) and dependent on diesel thermoelectrics and Venezuelan imports—makes it a poor test case for replicating the model nationwide. It also highlights a conflict of interest where distributors are tasked with implementing policies that reduce their own revenue.

The document analyzes a new legislative report on MP 910/2019, which modifies Law 11.952/2009. The authors conclude that the report preserves several regressions, reverses previous improvements, and includes unconstitutional legislative additions, particularly regarding the extension of timeframes for land regularization and the simplification of verification processes for large areas.

The document analyzes how 'jabuti' amendments to MP 901/2019 seek to lower the native vegetation coverage requirement from 80% to 50% in Roraima and Amapá by easing the conditions for Legal Reserve reductions and including non-environmental areas in the 65% territory threshold. It also warns that a proposal to reduce over 4,000 hectares of the Roraima National Forest is unconstitutional based on STF precedent.

The report provides a detailed 'radiography' of how Brazilian states are implementing the 2012 Forest Code. It identifies the analysis and validation of the CAR as the primary bottleneck and notes that while some states like Espírito Santo, Mato Grosso, and Pará have made significant progress, others remain severely delayed in regulating and operationalizing the PRA. The document also highlights the role of the Brazilian Forest Service (SFB) in developing technological tools to scale these processes.

The report provides a comprehensive 'radiography' of how Brazilian states are implementing the Forest Code. It identifies a significant gap between the high rates of CAR registration and the slow progress of CAR validation and PRA implementation. While some states in the North and Center-West regions are advanced, the Northeast region lags behind. The document highlights systemic barriers, including a lack of technical resources, poor quality of self-declared data, and a heavy dependence on the federal government's SICAR system. It also examines state-specific rules for restoring Permanent Preservation Areas (APP) and Legal Reserves (RL), noting wide variations in restoration deadlines and methodologies.

The document assesses the UK's proposed law to minimise deforestation linked to 'forest risk commodities', arguing that its reliance on 'relevant local laws' creates a loophole that would allow commodities from Brazil to enter the UK market even if they result from legalised deforestation. It details several Brazilian legislative proposals (such as PL 2633/2020 and PL 490/2007) that aim to legalise land grabbing and restrict Indigenous land rights. ClientEarth recommends that the UK adopt an objective standard covering all deforestation, mandate free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) for Indigenous Peoples, and explicitly include cattle, soy, and non-agricultural commodities like mining and oil and gas in the framework.

The document is an appendix of consulted legislation for a report on forest restoration in the Amazon. It catalogs federal laws and specific state-level legal frameworks from Acre, Amapá, Amazonas, Mato Grosso, Pará, and Rondônia, and Roraima. The listed legislation covers a wide range of environmental governance topics, including the Forest Code, REDD+ mechanisms, Environmental Regularization Programs (PRA), and state-specific policies on bioeconomy, agroecology, and payment for environmental services.

The report analyzes how state policies in the Brazilian Amazon facilitate or hinder forest restoration. It finds that while states have been pioneers in REDD+ and PSA and are essential for implementing the Forest Code via CAR and PRA, significant gaps remain. These include a lack of integrated governance, insufficient incentives for voluntary restoration, and bureaucratic barriers to native species silviculture. Pará is highlighted as the most advanced state, being the only one with a comprehensive State Native Vegetation Recovery Plan (PRVN-PA) and a mechanism for restoration concessions on public lands.

The report identifies a significant opportunity for carbon capture in the Brazilian Amazon, estimating that natural regeneration of deforested areas could sequester up to 26 GtCO₂. It proposes the Reversing Deforestation Mechanism (RDM), a jurisdictional results-based payment system, which could mobilize up to US$ 784 billion over 30 years at a carbon price of US$ 50 per ton. The RDM is presented as a complementary tool alongside JREDD+ (focused on reducing deforestation) and the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF, focused on conserving standing forests) to help Brazil meet its NDC targets and transition to a low-carbon economy.