European financial pressure against deforestation to increase, says MEP

The pressure on Brazil from clients and financiers concerned about the lack of environmental policies should grow, says Swedish MEP Pär Holmgren, who was part of the European Parliament delegation at COP26, in Glasgow.

Holmgren, who sits on the environment and agriculture committees in parliament, was one of around 15 MEPs who attended a meeting with Brazilian Environment Minister Joaquim Leite during the climate conference, which ended last Saturday (13 ).

He says that the European Union’s definition of its green taxonomy, which determines which investments and projects are considered sustainable — and therefore will be encouraged — should make even more frequent the reticence of funds and customers towards products that carry risk to be related to deforestation or other environmental and social damages.

Holmgren affirmed that he considers it positive that the Brazilian government has presented goals during COP26, but he said that concrete actions are lacking and that deforestation figures reveal a worrying reality.

He also did not consider Leite’s response on the Bolsonaro government’s commitment to indigenous peoples satisfactory, and regretted that projects considered harmful to the environment and to land issues remain on the agenda.

Regarding the EU agreement with Mercosur, however, the member of the Green bloc says that its future will depend on how much support the liberal and social-democratic groups will give to the conservative PPE bloc, the largest in Parliament, which, according to him, prioritizes commercial results on environmental or human rights.

What was the meeting between the Members of Parliament and the Brazilian minister about? The main climate issue with Brazil is always deforestation. We’ve heard that the country intends to end it by 2030, which is good, but we don’t know what it will be like by then. Many governments talk about the future but pay little attention to what happens in the present. And the newly released numbers of deforestation in the Amazon are not good [na véspera, dados do Inpe mostraram desmatamento recorde para um mês de outubro].

The Bolsonaro government announced it would bring the end of illegal deforestation to 2028 It is good that there are plans to end illegal deforestation, but if the government can decide what is legal and what is not, a serious climate problem remains.

Did the presentation by the minister convince MEPs that the Bolsonaro government intends to protect the forest? I wouldn’t use the verb convince. It is important that Brazil, India and China have long-term goals. All countries understand that we have a serious problem and we have to act. But as a meteorologist and deputy, I know that between science and politics there is still a chasm. The distance between mitigation measures [prevenção do desmatamento] and adaptation [redução de danos] It worries me a lot, because we know how vulnerable the Amazon rainforest is.

In Sweden, where I come from, there are also many forests and there is fear of a negative impact from the Gulf Stream, which could intensify the cold. But, from the climatic point of view, the vulnerability of the Amazon is much greater. A small rise in temperature or loss of moisture can damage the entire forest, make it drier, increase the risk of fire, creating a vicious circle that can feed back very quickly even in this century.

Do you consider that Brazilian policies are not enough to prevent this risk? This is one of the main concerns. In Brazil, if we do not adopt mitigation measures very quickly, unfortunately we will soon have to discuss the country in terms of damages and losses, as one of the areas of the world where the disaster is irreversible and adaptation is not possible anymore. Seriously, I hope that doesn’t happen, for the good of Brazilians and the rest of the world. The fate of the Amazon rainforest affects the entire planet.

Mr. raised this risk of irreversible loss in the meeting with the minister? No. As the European Parliament delegation has about 15 members, my colleagues asked about other points and I focused on the indigenous issue. We know that in general, and in Brazil, they are very affected by policies involving the forest. I did not consider the response I received from the minister to be satisfactory. My impression is that the Brazilian government does not take responsibility for these communities.

Bills that are pending in the Brazilian Congress and are considered harmful to environmental and human rights issues in the Amazon were the subject of a letter sent by MEPs to Brazilian lawmakers. Despite criticism, the Bolsonaro government maintained its support for them. Does this affect the relationship between the EU and Brazil, when evaluating issues such as the trade agreement with Mercosur, for example? I am from the Green bloc in Parliament, which advocates that the EU’s foreign trade be based on social justice, respect for indigenous communities and the environment. But for the conservative PPE bloc [Partido do Povo Europeu], the biggest in parliament, trade is more important, even if it’s not fair.

We are 10% of MEPs, and they exceed 30%. If they join the liberals and the Social Democrats, they get a vast majority.

What does the Brazilian government need to do to show Europeans an acceptable commitment to the Amazon? Zero deforestation. The Brazilian forest is different from the Swedish one, where biodiversity is small, few species like to grow there. The Amazon rainforest has one of the greatest biodiversity in the world, it began to develop over 3 million years ago, while the Swedish forests are at most 5,000 years old. If in Sweden we have reforestation targets, in Brazil the situation is incomparable. The Brazilian government needs to understand how precious and vulnerable this ecosystem is and do everything possible to protect it.

The minister stated in Glasgow that preserving the Amazon is expensive and requires investment. Is there a lack of money or a lack of political will? The two perspectives are not mutually exclusive. It is a fact that historically Europe and the United States are responsible for the climate crisis and we have to assume this responsibility. Part of that goes through financing.

Corporations, sovereign wealth funds and investment funds put pressure on and even halted transactions with Brazil because of the lack of environmental policies. Is commercial and financial pressure a good strategy? I believe so. Hope so. It is part of the Paris Agreement that the financing is aligned with the goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. That pressure is set to get even greater now that the European Union is defining its green taxonomy, which will determine which type of funding is sustainable and which is not.

RAIO-X | Pär Holmgren, 66,

MEP for the group of the Greens. Swedish, he holds a Ph.D. from Uppsala University in meteorology, where he worked as an ecological damage specialist for the Länsförsäkringar insurance group. He was a member of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation and the Swedish Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology. In the European Parliament, he is a member of the Environment Committee and is a substitute member of the Agriculture Committee.