Opinion – Rodrigo Tavares: Monitoring the Amazon and the Cerrado is not at risk, says Inpe director

Since 1961, Inpe (National Institute for Space Research) has carried out an extensive menu of studies on outer space and the terrestrial environment. It is a recognized scientific center on the subject in Latin America. But it is the monitoring of the Amazon that gives it public visibility and throws it into the political fire every time it announces annual data on deforestation in the Amazon.

In an interview with the column, the institute’s director, Clezio Marcos De Nardin, appointed in 2020 and averse to political spice, spoke about the institution’s current challenges, at a time when the preservation of Brazilian biomes has once again shamed the country and stoked the contempt of the international community against the President of the Republic.

In 2021, INPE closed with the lowest budget in ten years, raising public alerts about its operational bottleneck and the risk of freezing monitoring of the Amazon and the cerrado. De Nardin does not deny the restrictions, but points out that the “budget trend is not new. It started in 2010 and has been occurring throughout the last decade.” In 2012 the budget was BRL 146 million, falling to BRL 86 million in 2021.

In 2022, Inpe has managed to reverse this situation, “with a small increase in this year’s Annual Budget Law (LOA) and with extra-budgetary resources obtained through the National Fund for Scientific and Technological Development (FNCDT) of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. (MCTI). With that, we can say that no, the Amazon and Cerrado Monitoring Program are not at risk”, says the director.

Currently, official data on deforestation in the Amazon are measured by Inpe through Prodes (Program for Monitoring the Brazilian Amazon Forest by Satellite), which uses satellite images from the Landsat series, from NASA/USGS (USA).

But if Brazil is well aware of the annual rite for the announcement of deforestation data, with the same format since 1988, it will not be possible to improve the quality of this data, with the use of new technologies and practices, raising Inpe to a greater degree of sophistication. and accuracy in data collection?

The accuracy of the data, according to the director, has improved over time with the introduction of new sensors and satellites. Currently, “it is higher than 93% for Prodes data, as reported in scientific publications”.

Inpe has also adopted a policy of transparency since 2004, allowing “complete access to all data generated by monitoring systems. With this, it is possible for independent institutions to carry out their own independent assessments, including the government in its various instances, academia and society as a whole.”

In addition, “with the advances in machine learning technologies and the increase in the availability of images from remote sensors available in the world market, Inpe projects have been improving their methodologies, implementing artificial intelligence algorithms, with subsequent validation of the results and thus providing the maintenance of the quality of the information”, highlights De Nardin.

Despite advances, there is still work to be done. Inpe/Prodes is still unable to provide monthly deforestation data, only annual data, which would be essential for closer monitoring of Brazilian biomes. According to the director, this is in the institution’s plans through the Brazilian Biomes Monitoring Program (BiomasBR-MCTI), which aims to expand the current operational monitoring systems and add innovative processes, “allowing the monitoring of changes in land cover, carbon accounting, quantification of air pollution and climate risks for key economic activities.”

Monthly data would also be an essential tool for us to be able to more accurately identify which federal governments have contributed the most to the destruction of environmental value. Inpe’s official deforestation data (from August 1 of one year to July 31 of the following year) do not coincide with the periods of presidential terms. In addition, it is necessary to take into account that the new guidelines of a newly sworn president in relation to environmental preservation, whether positive or negative, take some time to be absorbed by the local dynamics in the Amazon. Announcements of inflation or quality of education, made a few months after taking office, cannot be attributed to the new occupant of the Planalto either.

With Inpe’s annual data, it is possible to safely state that the five highest annual deforestation rates since 1988 were reached, in descending order, in the years 1995, 2004, 2003, 2002 and 1988, in the governments of FHC, Lula and Sarney. It is also possible to state that the 13,235 km² of Amazon forest deforested between August 1, 2020 and July 31, 2021 represent a 75% increase over deforestation in 2018, the year in which Bolsonaro won the elections. But to register the guilt in person at the notary, we need monthly data.

Another future challenge for Inpe would be to monitor who causes deforestation and when the forest is deforested, using satellites with more precision. Inpe’s data have ecological, scientific and political value, but lack judicial feasibility. However, the director of the institute rules out this possibility: “INPE/MCTI does not have the mission to monitor who causes deforestation. Our mission is primarily associated with research and the delivery of a reliable and auditable number, based on a clear and public methodology.” .

Furthermore, it would be essential to exchange data and good practices for monitoring deforestation among all Amazonian countries (Brazil, Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, French Guiana and Suriname), because the causes of deforestation, whether they are natural or attributable to anthropic action (intensive agriculture, livestock activity, logging, mining), are often transboundary. The same happens with the annual rates of greenhouse gas emissions, whose calculation should be supported by all Amazonian countries. In Brazil, these data are computed by INPE, in the context of the National Strategy for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (ENREDD+).

But international work is scarce. Clezio Marcos De Nardin points out that “Inpe/MCTI has a seat on several commissions of the National Council for the Legal Amazon (Cnal) and follows an open data policy.” In addition, it collaborates with ACTO countries (Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization) providing “training at the Inpe/MCTI unit in Belém (PA) and online”, but the preservation of the Amazon continues to be managed in slices and with the teeth sharpened by the patriotism of each of the Amazonian countries. The smallness of Brazil is the result of its greatness.

Why does the Brazilian press not report on deforestation data from Colombia or Peru and their prevention policies? Or the Bolivian or Venezuelan data on the destruction of Amazonian biodiversity to allow comparisons with Brazilian performance? Monitoring deforestation in the Amazon and the cerrado needs more attention from everyone.