The importance of sustainability is the role it plays in securing the future of our planet, including humans, nonhuman organisms, and the environment. If an ecosystem cannot completely return to its original state after a disturbance, then resilience means the adaptability of a system to bounce back to a functioning state, given the variables in it. As defined by Walker et al, “Resilience is the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and still retain its basic function and structure (13).” To achieve sustainability, thinking in terms of resilience is crucial because through resilience, we can enhance and fortify our chances of recovery after disturbances. In its current state, Brazil’s Atlantic Forest is not sustainable because it does not meet the criteria for resilience.
The Atlantic Rainforest in Brazil is not only one of the world’s top five biodiversity hotspots, but it is also a deforestation and fragmentation hot spot. Smaller portions of the forest are located in Paraguay and Argentina, but it predominantly is in Brazil. It is home to over 20,000 plant species, of which 8,000 are endemic (Giorgi 2). Around 2,200 species of birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians are also harbored in the forest. In total, this accounts for 5% of the vertebrates on earth and over 200 bird species are endemic to the Atlantic forest. Nearly 60% of Brazil’s threatened animal species call the forest home (“About the Atlantic Forest in Brazil” 1) and the forest fragments that remain are often too small to allow species to thrive (Scarano and Ceotto 3). Originally, the Atlantic Forest of Brazil covered approximately 330 million acres of land (“About the Atlantic Forest in Brazil” 1) and accounted for up to 16% of Brazilian Territory (Giorgi 2). Currently, over 85% of the original forest has been cleared (“About the Atlantic Forest in Brazil” 1)
Deforestation not only impacts the flora and fauna of the forest, but it also impacts the humans and their communities that reside within the region. Within Brazil’s Atlantic Forest, there are many overlaps of systems between the human and natural world that come together to form sociological ecosystems, or socio-ecosystems for short. To uphold resilience, a socio-ecosystem must have strong natural, structural, and institutional buffers. Trees, plants, and other vegetation all form natural buffers that can protect environments from landslides, flooding, mudflows, and can even serve as natural water filters. Dams, seawalls, and other forms of infrastructure that protect people and wildlife from environmental disasters are all structural buffers, while institutional buffers are “the ways in which we make sure that we cooperate and minimize conflict (we can’t ever eliminate conflict) so that we keep our socio-ecosystems running (Harrell).” Institutional buffers manifest in the form of laws, customs, rituals, courts, governments, and regulations.
Many of Brazil’s cities were built over the Atlantic Forest and over 60% of the population lives within the Atlantic Forest’s domain. The Rio Doce Basin of the Atlantic Forest hosts small mining towns and the region suffered an extreme disturbance that put its resilience to the test in 2015 when a dam burst in the town of Mariana and caused a catastrophic mudflow. The dam had retained toxic sludge produced from mining runoff and when it burst, it overtook the entire tow, flowed into the Rio Doce river and then eventually infiltrated the Atlantic Ocean. Without the dam serving as the only structural buffer, there were no natural buffers to absorb the shock of the mudflow because of deforestation nor were there adequate institutional buffers to protect the socio-ecosystem. Although structural buffers can fortify a socio-ecosystem’s resilience against natural disasters, they are only as resilient as the institutions responsible for them. Despite regulations intended to manage its strength, the dam in the Rio Doce Basin still failed to protect the people and land. Environmental prosecutors have alleged that negligence and poor management and adherence to regulations were the reasons behind the dam failure, but the company responsible for maintaining the dam still denies responsibility and is still currently under investigation (Phillips). The damage of this disaster impacts not only the people who lost their homes, livelihoods, and loved ones, but it also affects the wildlife that was subject to the toxic sludge. Neither the natural, structural, or institutional buffers were strong enough to prevent the burst and the damage was so devastating that the Rio Doce Basin will take years to recover as the toxic sludge continues to make its way through the Atlantic Ocean. This disaster in Mariana exemplifies how resilience thinking is of the utmost importance when it comes to sustainability because of how interconnected systems are and how a disturbance in one system sets off a chain reaction in another.
Unfortunately, the Mariana disaster in the Rio Doce Basin is just one example of many of the challenges facing the tropical Atlantic Forest. Brazil’s two largest and wealthiest cities, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, are located within the forest. In addition to preventing and protecting against soil erosion, floods and landslides, the forest also assists in the maintenance of carbon stocks, the filtration of water, and the preservation of Brazil’s water supply (“Brazil’s Atlantic Forest” 1). The deforestation of Brazil’s Atlantic Forest has already threatened the region’s water supply. Despite accounting for 20% of the global water supply, the country is already facing a historic water shortage (Scarano and Ceotto 5). Although droughts occur naturally, scientists point out that human activity has impacted the severity and consequences of them. Without natural buffers, the risk of water degradation is amplified as these buffers filter out pollutants that would otherwise enter water systems. Additionally, the vegetation in forests play a crucial role in recycling precipitation, as deforestation reduces evaporation and results in the reduction of “the flux of moisture to the atmosphere, potentially decreasing the quantity of moisture available for precipitation (Betts, et al).”
Recently, the country’s biggest city São Paulo, a city of 20 million, just exited its own crisis after experiencing a two-year drought that forced the city to begin rationing its water supply. One of São Paulo’s major water systems is the Cantareira system that is made up of five separate reservoirs, provides for more than 12 million inhabitants of the São Paulo Metropolitan Region and Campinas, and is operating at the lowest capacity ever recorded since its creation in the early 1970s (Campari and Barrêto). According to Campari and Barreto, the Cantareira has lost 70% of its original forest cover and the degradation of its original forest cover has aggravated the sedimentation of rivers and dams, which decreases their ability to supply water, and has worsened the effects of erosion and drought (“Challenge in São Paulo”). São Paulo’s other main water system, the Alto Tietê reservoir network, is also operating at its lowest capacity with water levels below 15% (Lerer and Whately). This left many inhabitants without water, and in some cases, they have opted to leave São Paulo for cities with more water security or have attempted to drill their own wells to tap into groundwater. Many of those who remained in the area also began to hoard rainwater in canisters, which may have facilitated a dengue outbreak (Stauffer 2). In São Paulo, the drought could have been better managed if structural buffers of the water systems were adequate and institutional buffers had supported them. According to a Brazilian central government report, “37% of tap water is lost due to leaky pipes, fraud, and illegal access (Lobel).” Elsewhere in the Atlantic Forest region, other cities have either suffered from droughts or have endured massive flooding with damage that might have been curbed if not for deforestation.
The ecosystem services provided by the Atlantic Forest are essential to the well-being of Brazil’s population and economy that is dominated by agriculture, cattle ranching, industry, energy, manufacturing and services. Over 70% of Brazilian energy is from hydropower and according to Eduardo Braga, the Minister of Mines and Energy, if water levels dip below 10%, hydroelectric plants will stop running and would impede business activities. At the time of his announcement in March of 2015, water levels were at 17% (Kaiser 3). This drought has also impacted crop production and industrial activities, consequentially threatening food security and the country’s economy.
Culturally, a barrier that impinges on the region’s ability to obtain resilience is that the practice of sustainability in everyday life is not a common occurrence in Brazil. People frequently consume without being cognizant of how their consumption impacts the environment, recycling is an uncommon practice, and there the only public messages related to environmental issues tend to be concentrated in tourist points of attraction. Again, the blame is pointed back at the failure of institutions as waste management systems, infrastructure, and public services don’t meet the needs of people and their socio-ecosystems. Institutionally, the biggest obstacle is the current state of Brazilian politics. Brazil is ruled by an elite class and is plagued by scandals of corruption with tensions running high as post-World Cup and Olympic focus has shifted to political turmoil, including corruption, impeachment, scandals, mass protests, economic recession, and fears of a coup d’état. With attention shifted towards these concerns, there is little worry about pushing for greater socio-ecological resilience, as cuts to education, healthcare, and other social programs are implemented.
According to the Brundtland Report, “Sustainability meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” One of the conditions of this definition of sustainability is that sustainability is unachievable when poverty and inequality are prevalent. With the leadership of Lula and the Workers’ Party, the social and economic progress of the country pulled 29 million people out of poverty and inequality dropped significantly, but despite that, the country has historically been marred with poverty and inequality and still remains to be. Brazil is currently in the midst of a recession, with political turmoil following the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff, and much of the progress achieved has already begun unraveling (World Bank Brazil Overview). The Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatica (IBGE) in Portuguese, estimates Brazil’s current population to be around 206,081,432 people. According to the CIA’s World Factbook, 21.4% of the population live below the poverty line and approximately 4% are estimated to live below the “extreme” poverty line and a recent study done by the World Bank projects the number of people living in poverty could increase by anywhere from 2.5 to 3.6 million (Coutinho). With poverty on the rise, the IBGE reported that the unemployment rate for the third quarter of 2016 was at a record 12% (“PNAD Contínua: Taxa de Desocupação”). Additionally, The World Bank listed Brazil’s most recent GINI coefficient as only 51.5 (with 0 being absolute equality and 100 being absolute inequality) in 2014, and according to the World Bank the rate of reduction has stagnated after having falling significantly between 2003 and 2014. In a country characterized by stark contrasts of inequality, poor people can be forced into unsustainable behaviors and have fewer options in times of difficulty while the affluent are characterized by and even prize themselves on excessive consumption and have better means to counter difficulties. During the drought in São Paulo, those most adversely affected were the marginalized population as a result of a lack of basic infrastructure and services (Davies). In regions that have experienced flooding and landslides, the people most devastated by the disasters have been those living in poverty in homes that are structurally inadequate and in neighborhoods that have historically been neglected by the government. Those who live in low-income communities are underserved, underrepresented and have few options for protective measures against limited resources, and they have little chance of ameliorating these conditions due to the difficulty of achieving upward social mobility and the lack of access to public services.
The OED provides an additional definition of sustainability as “of, relating to, or designating forms of human economic activity and culture that do not lead to environmental degradation, esp. avoiding the long-term depletion of natural resources.” Brazil’s economic dependence on agriculture has become another institutional barrier that clashes with sustainability and resilience goals. With agriculture as a key base of Brazil’s economy, along with weak institutional barriers, legal and illegal deforestation has been driven through the Atlantic Forest to clear the way for the country’s agricultural industry, causing more environmental degradation. When stacked against both the Brundtland report and the OED’s definitions of sustainability, the socio-ecosystem of the Atlantic Forest region of Brazil is unsustainable and not resilient because of its rapid rate of deforestation, rapid depletion of natural resources, and widespread inequality and poverty.
To increase the resilience of Brazil’s Atlantic Forest, adaptive strategies must be created, maintained, or restored for the different systems that comprise the entire socio-ecosystem to boost resilience and prevent and mitigate dilemmas. Brazil has already initiated some different adaptive strategies in the Atlantic forest biome. One of the most ambitious strategies is called the “Atlantic Forest Restoration Pact” which is a collective initiative, with more than 200 institutions behind it, with an objective to restore 15 million hectares of Atlantic Forest until 2050 (Scarano and Ceotto 2324). Under this initiative, there are currently only 58,000 hectares in process of restoration, which only accounts for .03% of the goal, but from an optimistic view, some restoration still accounts for something. Still, more efforts need to be implemented to scale back deforestation and maintain current natural buffers. To make up for habitat loss and fragmentation, forest restoration needs to be prioritized with new growth forests structured to mimic old-growth forests; the forest should be heterogeneous with variations in density and space. Instead of managing for droughts only in times of emergency, the water supply should be managed for droughts, regardless of whether the country is currently enduring one, to bolster both adaptive capacity and resilience (Gutierrez et al, 99). Equally important is the need for the government to manage infrastructure and invest more in goods and services that will reduce the inequality and increase the chances of upward social mobility. Following the principles and philosophies of resilience-thinking would lead to a more sustainable world because it approaches sustainability holistically through integrating science management, and policy to enhance adaptability, embrace uncertainty, and manage risk (Curtin and Parker 922). As Brazil is currently not in a strong position to address all of these issues at once, trade-offs would have to be made in designing and implementing solutions. However, even if only a couple of issues were addressed and resolved, it would still push Brazil’s socio-ecosystem, and the rest of the world, in a better direction and so the institutions in place must be re-thought to better address these challenges to protect not only the environment, but also the livelihood of those within it.
Works Cited
“About the Atlantic Forest in Brazil.” The Nature Conservancy. 2016. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
“Better Life Index: Brazil.” Better Life Index. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/brazil. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.
“Cost of Living in Brazil.” Numbeo, 2017. www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/country_result.jsp?country=Brazil. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.
“Overview.” Brazil. The World Bank, 2017. www.worldbank.org/en/country/brazil/overview. Accessed 12 Feb. 2017.
“PNAD Contínua: taxa de desocupação foi de 12,0% no quarto trimestre de 2016 e média do ano fecha em 11,5%.” Sala de Imprensa. Instituo Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatíca, 2017. saladeimprensa.ibge.gov.br/noticias.html?view=noticia&id=1&idnoticia=3367&busca=1&t=pnad-continua-taxa-desocupacao-foi-12-0-quarto-trimestre-2016-media-ano. Accessed 10 Feb. 2017.
“Population Estimates for July 1, 2016.” Population Estimates. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatíca, 2016. www.ibge.gov.br/english/estatistica/populacao/estimativa2016/estimativa_tcu.shtm. Accessed 11 Feb. 2017.
Betts, Richard, et al. “Effects of large-scale Amazon forest degradation on climate and air quality through fluxes of carbon dioxide, water, energy, mineral dust and isoprene.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 363, 2008. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2375954. Accessed 14 Feb. 2017.
Campari, João, and Samuel Barrêto. “Challenge in São Paulo: Overcoming Water Scarcity in South America’s Largest City.” Conservancy Talk, The Nature Conservancy. 15 Feb. 2017. blog.nature.org/conservancy/2014/05/22/challenge-in-sao-paulo-overcoming-water-scarcity-in-south-americas-largest-city. Accessed 14 Feb. 2017.
Coutinho, David. “Regresso: Brasil Cominhando Para Mais Desigualdade.” 13 Feb. 2017. Web. 15 Feb. 2017.
CURTIN, CHARLES G., and JESSICA P. PARKER. “Foundations of Resilience Thinking.” Conservation Biology 28.4 (2014): 912-923. Academic Search Complete. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.
Davis, Wyre. “Brazil Drought: São Paulo Sleepwalking into Water Crisis.” 7 Nov. 2015. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.
Giorgi, Ana Paula. “Preserving Biodiversity in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil and its Araucaria Moist Forest Ecoregion.” 1 Oct. 2007. Web. 24 Feb. 2016.
Gromko, Duncan. “Brazil’s Atlantic Forest Faces Many Environmental Challenges.” DC Bureau. 3 May 2013. Web. 24 Feb. 2016.
Gutierrez, Ana Paula A. et al. “Drought Preparedness in Brazil.” 22 Dec. 2013. Web. ScienceDirect. 5 Mar. 2016.
Harrell, Steven. “Sustainability and Resilience?” ANTH 378: Sustainability, Culture, and Society: Lesson 4. University of Washington, Seattle. 2016. Online Presentation.
Kaiser, Anna J. “Here are the 4 Challenges Rio de Janeiro Must Meet to Host a Successful 2016 Olympics.” Time. 2 April 2015. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
Lerer, Rebeca, and Marussia Whately. “Water Rationing Alone Won’t Save São Paulo.” The Guardian. 11 Feb. 2015. Web. 14 Feb. 2017.
Lobel, Fabrício. “Brasil Desperdiça 37% da Água Tratada, Aponta Relatório do Governo Federal.” Folha de São Paulo. 21 Jan. 2015. Web. 13 Feb. 2017.
Nazareno, Alison G, and William F Laurance. “Brazil’s Drought: Beware Deforestation.” Science (New York, N.Y.) 347.6229 (2015): 1427. Print.
Phillips, Dom. “Brazil’s Mining Tragedy: Was it a Preventable Disaster?” The Guardian. 25 Nov. 2015. Web. 26 Feb. 2016.
Scarano, Fabio, and Rubio Ceotto. “Brazilian Atlantic Forest: Impact, Vulnerability, and Adaptation to Climate Change.” Biodiversity and Conservation 24.9 (2015): 2319-331. Web. 7 Mar. 2016.
Walker, Brian, Walker, B. H., and Salt, David Reid, Walter. Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World. Washington, DC, USA: Island, 2006. Web.
Jennifer Kim 