Brazil and the Environment

https://www.humantruth.info/brazil_environment.html

By Vexen Crabtree 2024

Brazil Federative Republic of Brazil [Country Profile Page]
Status	Independent State
Social and Moral Index	50th best
Capital	Brasilia
Land Area	8 459 420km²₁
Location	South America, The Americas
Population	209.5m₂
Life Expectancy	72.75yrs (2017)₃
GNI	$14 370 (2017)₄
ISO3166-1 Codes	BR, BRA, 76₅
Internet Domain	.br₆
Currency	Real (BRL)₇
Telephone	+55₈

Brazil ranks 55th in the world in terms of its responsibility towards the environment. This is computed using 21 data sets. Brazil comes in the best 20 for the rate of rational beliefs on the environment in the population₉ (one of the highest in The Americas). It does better than average in terms of its sign-up rate to major international accords on protecting the environment, its score on the Green Future Index₁₀ and in its environmental performance₁₁. Brazil doesn't do so well in other areas. Brazil does worse than average when it comes to energy to GDP efficiency₁₂ and in its forested percent change 2000-2020₁₃. And finally, it falls into the worst 20 in reducing annual meat consumption per person₁₄. Former climate-change-denying President Jair Bolsonaro ran a long-term campaign to remove environmental protections and increase corporate freedom, resulting in deforestation rising to a 15-year high₁₅ and doing severe damage to the country (and the world's) health. Since he lost power in 2022 to President Lula da Silva, Brazil's behaviour has improved substantially.

1. Brazil's Responsibility Towards The Environment

#climate_change #the_environment

Compared to The Americas (2025)₁₆
Pos.		Lower is better Avg Rank₁₆
1	Uruguay	43.2
2	Puerto Rico	47.1
3	Costa Rica	49.7
	...
8	Guatemala	66.1
9	Mexico	66.3
10	El Salvador	67.4
11	Brazil	70.2
12	Colombia	70.9
13	Argentina	78.5
14	Dominica	78.5
15	Cuba	79.4
16	Nicaragua	80.5
	The Americas Avg	92.66
q=36.

Responsibility Towards The Environment (2025)₁₆
Pos.		Lower is better Avg Rank₁₆
1	Sri Lanka	34.9
2	Uruguay	43.2
3	Switzerland	45.0
	...
52	Guinea	67.1
53	El Salvador	67.4
54	Bangladesh	69.7
55	Brazil	70.2
56	Maldives	70.5
57	Ivory Coast	70.8
58	Colombia	70.9
59	Togo	71.1
	World Avg	84.93
q=199.

All countries' current and historical approach towards the environment is gauged via 21 datasets, including multiple decades of data on its forested percent change 2000-2020, its environmental performance, energy to GDP efficiency, its sign-up rate to major international accords on protecting the environment, the rate of rational beliefs on the environment in the population, reducing annual meat consumption per person and its score on the Green Future Index.

The countries that do the best (Sri Lanka, Uruguay and Switzerland) tend to have avoided the excesses of early industrial countries, and have not yet repeated the same mistakes of environmental destruction - at least, not on the same scale. The regions with the best average results per country are Central America, South America and Scandinavia. The worst are Eritrea, The Vatican City and Timor-Leste (E. Timor), and the worst regions Micronesia, Australasia and Melanesia.

For more, see:

" Countries With the Best Environmental Records" by Vexen Crabtree (2025).

2. Data Sets

2.1. Forest Area Change 2000-2020

#biodiversity #deforestation #environmentalism #forests #over-exploitation #the_environment

Forest Area Change 2000-2020 Higher is better₁₃
Pos.		Total₁₃
1	Guernsey	82.6%
2	Bahrain	75.2%
3	Iceland	64.7%
	...
194	Indonesia	-9.2%
195	Ecuador	-9.2%
196	Ghana	-9.7%
197	Brazil	-10.1%
198	Guinea	-11.0%
199	Mozambique	-11.1%
200	Sao Tome & Principe	-11.1%
201	Mayotte	-11.6%
	The Americas Avg	-2.1%
	World Avg	-0.1%
q=234.

With respect to its forested percent change 2000-2020, Brazil comes 197th in the world.

From 2000 to 2010, Brazil destroyed 40.5 million hectares of forest cover, over six times more than any other country in that period, and damaging not just itself, but the entire world. It held the same dubious record from 2010 to 2020, destroying another 15 million hectares.

Former President Jair Bolsonaro ran a long-term campaign to remove environmental protections and increase corporate freedom, resulting in deforestation rising to a 15-year high₁₅ and doing severe damage to the country (and the world's) health. Since he lost power in 2022 to President Lula da Silva, Brazil's behaviour has improved substantially. Haunted by the fact that in 2022, 40% of the world's deforestation was in Brazil alone, the new government's environment minister said in 2023 “we are changing the image of the country when we change this reality”.₁₅

Forests are carbon sinks, mitigating against climate change₁₇_,₁₈. Unfortunately, we are destroying over 70,000 km² of forest each year₁₉. In the last few thousand years, we've removed 30-40% of the Earth's forest cover₂₀_,₁₈, mostly to clear space for agriculture, and for logging₂₁_,₂₂. The produce from both is shipped from poorer countries to richer ones. Half-hearted government efforts and company obfuscation of supply chains makes it almost impossible for consumers to tell which foods and products are from sustainable sources, and which ones are encouraging irresponsible deforestation, meaning that there is little incentive for companies to relent.

The effects are catastrophic. 15% of all greenhouse gas emissions are the result of deforestation₂₃_,₂₁. It brings soil erosion from wind and rain which, over time, can almost-permanently stop any hope of growing food₂₄, and spreads desertification. Entire ecosystems are collapsing as a result, including ones that we depend upon₂₅. The water cycle is driven by forests, and their loss reduces ordinary rainfall, increases flooding, removes an abundant source of water filtration, and contributes to a rise in water levels.₂₆.

Some regions of the world are increasing their forest cover₁₈; the best from 2000-2020 are Scandinavia (13.8% ), The Balkans (11.0% ) and Baltic States (7.6% )₁₃. There is an overall trend that developed countries gathered their riches by using up their natural resources, and now, they pay poorer countries to use up theirs instead, whilst they can afford to slowly rebuild their natural environments. But it's not wholly that simple - some rich regions are still burning through what they've got. The regions clearing their forests fastest are Central America (-12.8% ), Africa (-9.1% ) and North America (-2.9% )₁₃.

For more, see:

"Deforestation" by Vexen Crabtree (2024).

Averages by decade for Brazil (for the ranks, lower is better):

Forest Area Change 2000-2020	2000s Average	2010s Average
Brazil:	-7.2%	-2.9%
World Rank:	208th	⇡ 183rd
World Avg:	0.6%	-0.7%

2.2. Environmental Performance

#climate_change #energy #sustainability #the_environment

Environmental Performance Higher is better₁₁
Pos.		2018₁₁
1	Switzerland	87.4
2	France	84.0
3	Denmark	81.6
	...
66	Egypt	61.2
67	Lebanon	61.1
68	Macedonia	61.1
69	Brazil	60.7
70	Sri Lanka	60.6
71	Equatorial Guinea	60.4
72	Mexico	59.7
73	Dominica	59.4
	The Americas Avg	58.8
	World Avg	56.4
q=180.

Brazil ranks 69th in the world with regard to its environmental performance.

The Environmental Performance Index 2018 data includes 24 indicators including air pollution, water and sanitation, biodiversity, ecosystems and environmental health, combined into a single score by country, by the Yale University Center for Environmental Law & Policy.

2.3. Energy to GDP Efficiency

#energy #sustainability #the_environment

Energy to GDP Efficiency Lower is better₁₂
Pos.		2022 Avg₁₂
1	Rwanda	0.25
2	Chad	0.26
3	Tanzania	0.31
	...
92	Chile	1.11
93	Honduras	1.15
94	Slovenia	1.15
95	Brazil	1.16
96	Luxembourg	1.16
97	Netherlands	1.17
98	Azerbaijan	1.18
99	Norway	1.19
	The Americas Avg	1.42
	World Avg	1.23
q=165.

Brazil is positioned 95th in the world regarding energy to GDP efficiency.

GDP per unit of energy consumption is often called 'Energy Intensity'. It's how efficient countries are at producing GDP in terms of primary energy use. It represents primary energy consumption using the substitution method, per unit of gross domestic product (GDP). A lower value means that less energy was used to maintain the country's GDP.

Averages by decade for Brazil (for the ranks, lower is better):

Energy to GDP Efficiency	1960s Average	1970s Average	1980s Average	1990s Average	2000s Average	2010s Average
Brazil:	0.94	1.10	1.24	1.33	1.22	1.14
World Rank:	16th	⇡ 15th	⇣ 69th	⇣ 75th	⇣ 76th	⇣ 87th
World Avg:	2.05	2.13	2.10	2.15	1.60	1.30

2.4. International Accords on the Environment

#environmentalism #internationalism

International Accords on the Environment Higher is better
Pos.		Total Avg Rate
1	Sweden	83%
2	Canada	82%
3	Norway	81%
	...
21	Montenegro	72%
22	Peru	72%
23	Mauritius	72%
24	Brazil	71%
25	Chile	71%
26	S. Africa	71%
27	Cyprus	71%
28	Japan	70%
	The Americas Avg	60.7%
	World Avg	57.5%
q=197.

Brazil comes 24th in the world when it comes to its sign-up rate to major international accords on protecting the environment.

Each country is scored using a formula that takes the date each country took up major international environmental agreements, as a ratio of maximum possible days. The agreements covered are: (1) the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, (2) the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for certain hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides, (3) the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, (4) the Waigani Convention (for those countries that are eligible), (5) the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), (6) the Kyoto Protocol and (7) its successor, the Paris Agreement, (8) the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), (9) the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and finally, (10) the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer.

For more, see:

" Countries With the Best Environmental Records" by Vexen Crabtree (2025).

It was one of the 31 countries that signed the Basel Convention during its first year and also one of 18 countries who enacted the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in its first year (1975).

Averages by decade for Brazil (for the ranks, lower is better):

International Accords on the Environment	1970s Average	1980s Average	1990s Average	2000s Average	2010s Average
Brazil:	42%	33%	69%	87%	99%
World Rank:	16th	⇣ 42nd	⇡ 17th	⇣ 40th	⇡ 11th
World Avg:	8.5%	23.3%	45.0%	74.4%	90.7%

2.5. Rational Beliefs on the Environment

Rational Beliefs on the Environment Higher is better₉
Pos.		2011 %₉
1	Argentina	78.3%
2	Greece	77.6%
3	Brazil	77.1%
4	Trinidad & Tobago	74.5%
5	Costa Rica	74.2%
6	Cyprus	71.0%
7	Guatemala	70.9%
8	Philippines	70.8%
9	S. Korea	70.7%
10	Colombia	70.3%
11	Bolivia	69.3%
12	Paraguay	68.9%
	The Americas Avg	58.6%
	World Avg	39.9%
q=145.

Brazil comes 3rd-best in the world regarding the rate of rational beliefs on the environment in the population.

2.6. Meat Consumption

#animal_rights #animal_welfare #diet #food #health #meat #veganism #vegetarianism

Meat Consumption Lower is better₁₄
Pos.		2021 kg₁₄
1	Congo, DR	03.0
2	Burundi	03.5
3	Bangladesh	04.3
	...
171	Portugal	94.6
172	St Kitts & Nevis	96.6
173	Chile	97.8
174	Brazil	98.8
175	Spain	100.3
176	Samoa	106.2
177	Israel	107.7
178	St Vincent & Grenadines	109.5
	The Americas Avg	70.3
	World Avg	52.5
q=185.

Brazil ranks 12th-worst in the world in terms of reducing annual meat consumption per person.

There are five key arguments in favour of vegetarianism which accrue even from partial adoption: (1) Vegetarian diets have notable health advantages over carnivorous diets, especially for heart and cardiovascular issues₂₇_,₂₈_,₂₉. (2) It is morally better to avoid killing or harming animals. (3) Plant-based diets use much less water than carnivorous ones, to the extent that agricultural and water management scientists urge governments to encourage people to switch₃₀. (4) Vegetarian food production uses substantially less land₂₇_,₃₁_,₃₂. And, (5) vegetarianism is better for the environment than meat-production for emissions, sewerage, pollution and chemicals usage.₂₇_,₃₁. A plant-based diet causes 75% less greenhouse gas emissions than a typical carnivorous diet₃₂. The global food industry causes about 1/3 of all planet-heating emissions, and so "to slow the worst climate effects, the United Nations has called for a drastic reduction in meat consumption"₃₂. Despite this, "reducing appetites for carbon-intensive meat and dairy is incredibly hard"₃₃ and as countries get richer, they tend to eat more meat.

In the 2010s, meat consumption per person in Brazil was nearly double the global average (of 49kgs per year), putting unnecessary strain on water supplies and the environment.₁₄ Brazil is the world's largest beef exporter, but has been "increasingly under siege for the carbon footprint of its cattle ranches [especially for] rising deforestation, much of which is driven by the meat industry"₃₄. That industry is powerful in Brazil, and has successfully resisted long-term attempts by government and the international community to slow down its rate of land clearance. But, surprisingly some things are changing, led by a grassroots change in consumption.

Health concerns over poor quality diets have led a surge in the number of vegetarians in Brazil, doubling from 2012-2018 to encompass 14% of the population, driven by concerns over health, the environmental impact of its large beef industry, and by vocal animal rights movements₃₄.

On average throughout the 2010s, Brazil's rate was 95.7.

2.7. Green Future Index

#amazon_rainforest #brazil #climate_change #deforestation #energy #sustainability #the_environment

Green Future Index Higher is better₁₀
Pos.		2023 Score₁₀
1	Iceland	6.7
2	Finland	6.7
3	Norway	6.4
	...
35	Slovakia	4.8
36	UAE	4.8
37	Morocco	4.7
38	Brazil	4.7
39=	Romania	4.7
39=	Kenya	4.7
41	New Zealand	4.6
42=	Philippines	4.6
	The Americas Avg	4.6
	World Avg	4.8
q=76.

Brazil comes 38th in the world regarding its score on the Green Future Index.

The Green Futures Index (GFI) has been running since 2021, and looks at 23 data sets for over 70 countries, with a focus on effectiveness, policy and planning 'for a low carbon future. It is complementary to existing goals and frameworks for sustainable development'. Datasets include qualitative appraisals and quantitative measurements on carbon emissions across multiple sectors, renewable and nuclear energy, recycling capabilities, green technologies used in building and construction, transport, scientific and industrial green innovations and patent quantities, climate action and climate policies. Each country is then ranked by their final score.₃₅.

3. The Destruction of the Amazon Rainforest

#agriculture #amazon_rainforest #brazil #environmentalism #exploitation #farming #jair_bolsonaro #rainforests #soya

The Amazon rainforest, over half of which is in Brazil, hosts 15% of Earth's biodiversity, 40% of our tropical forests, and 'stores tens of billions of tonnes of carbon'₁₈. In the last 40 years, we have destroyed 20% of it, generally for cattle farmers and plantations₃₆. Soya-bean producers too, as a result of a surge in demand for things like chicken feed₃₇, since the 1990s₂₅_,₃₆. Before this period, it took us 450 years to clear the same amount₃₆. One third of all species on Earth only live in the Amazon₃₆, and we have directly caused the extinction of thousands of them.

In 2020, helped by Covid-19 lockdowns, the world's carbon emissions may have fallen by 7%. But not in Brazil, which increased its emissions by 10-20% compared to when they were last measured, in 2018.₃₇

“The culprit is deforestation. In the first four months of 2020 an estimated 1,202 square km (464 square miles) were cleared in the Brazilian Amazon, 55% more than during the same period in 2019, which was the worst year in a decade. Come August, when ranchers set fire to cleared areas to prepare them for grazing, runaway blazes could outnumber those that shocked the world last year.
Environmentalists blame Brazil's populist president, Jair Bolsonaro, for the catastrophe. He favours deregulation to allow logging, mining and farming in the forest. [...] In a video of a cabinet meeting in April [2020] released by the Supreme Court, the environment minister, Ricardo Salles, called on the government to "push through" deregulation while people are distracted by the pandemic. [...]
In 2009, a damning report from Greenpeace led JBS, Marfrig and Minerva, meat giants which together handle two-thirds of Brazil's exports, to pledge to stop buying from suppliers that deforest illegally.... using satellites to detect clearing. Soya traders such as Cargill and Bunge have used such systems... since 2008, when retail firms like McDonald's and Tesco said they would no longer buy Amazonian soya harvested on deforested land.”
The Economist (2020)₃₇

But it is only occasionally that public relations pressure is strong enough to force companies - and Brazilian presidents - to take action. Since 2012, the temporary drop in deforestation was obliterated by renewed chopping₃₇.

One easy way around the rules against buying produce from deforested land is so simple, it's painful to hear of its effectiveness. Firms use deforested land to fatten up their livestock, and then move the cattle to legal farms before selling them. On paper, it looks legit as long as you don't do any investigating. Easy - and it's obvious. After Greenpeace reported that a protected Amazon reserve was destroyed, and that JBS, Marfrig and Minerva sold beef grown on the cleared land, they claimed that they didn't know it had come from illegal sources₃₇. Smaller companies are much worse on average, but harder to keep track of. So the lie is allowed to persist by the companies involved, by the Brazilian government and by its law enforcers.

For more, see:

"Deforestation" by Vexen Crabtree (2024).