[Português em baixo. This post is a translation of a blog discussing a class at INEAF facilitated by Prof. Valério Gomes (UFPA) and Prof. Gregory Thaler (UGA), published originally on the INEAF website.]
The discussion in the INEAF graduate course “Climate Change and Amazonia” this Tuesday, April 25th highlighted various concerns related to Earth Day, with the arrival of El Niño, the evolution of macroeconomic policies for regional development, and the situation of environmental (un)governance.
The conversation was facilitated by Prof. Valério Gomes – UFPA and Prof. Gregory Thaler – UGA, and engaged with the article “Projeto Amazônia 4.0: definindo uma terceira via para a Amazônia [Amazonia 4.0: a third path for Amazonia],” by Ismael Nobre and Carlos Nobre.
Prof. Thaler presented his research on anti-deforestation policies implemented in the context of PPCDAm [Plan for Preventing and Combating Deforestation in the Amazon] and showed linkages between various levels of local, regional, national, and global governance.
In this context, the goal of reducing deforestation was achieved, becoming a reference for international studies on the topic, although it occurred largely under a logic of command and control, and there was a displacement of deforestation to other areas in greater Amazonia, for example to Bolivia. In that country there was an increase in deforestation linked to the activities of groups connected to Brazilian agro-industry.
Over the course of the afternoon, the discussion culminated in the following questions: Do we, Amazonians, have or can we have a voice in what is discussed, produced, or imposed on the territory of which we are a part? Is knowledge construction genuinely local and anchored in an empistemology of traditional knowledge? Or do colonial sophistications operate currently through a logic that imposes a “Global South” vision linked to capital? Is it really true that “when the criterion is biodiversity, we are number 1 on the planet” (Ismael Nobre/Carlos Nobre)? When the forest is dead, will it be the foundation of development 4.0 or climate (un)control?
Class discussions also inspired reflection about the capacity of civil society institutions working in Amazonia to evaluate the failings and successes in their proposals that became public policy over the last decades. If we do not recognize the work of organized rural communities to diminish the effects of social inequalities and climate emergency and their potential to advance solutions, we will end up perpetuating the same problems created by capitalism. More than an Era of Change, we need a Change of Era for Amazonia.
Written by: Iná Camila, Carlos Ramos, and Ana Felicien – PPGAA Graduate Students