Payment for environmental services is the subject of a public hearing in the Federal Senate

The Federal Senate's Environment Committee held a public hearing to debate the current stage of implementation, impacts and prospects for using Payment for Environmental Services (PSA) and Environmental Regularization Programs (PRA). Environmental services can be provided by good agricultural practices that favor the maintenance, recovery or improvement of ecosystem functions.

Embrapa Cerrados researcher Luciano Mattos represented Embrapa and presented information about the network projects developed by the company that contribute, directly or indirectly, to the Forest Code. He also reviewed some contributions to the formulation of public policies focusing on the concept of environmental services aimed at the issue of sustainable production and the productive transition of systems that encompass this dual function of rural property: producing and preserving. “For some years, the approach has been focused not only on environmental issues, but also on the provision of environmental services by mixed production systems, such as agroforestry systems and ILPF”, he explained.

Regarding the projects developed by Embrapa, he highlighted the special project on the Forest Code. Special projects are those required by Embrapa's Executive Board based on major national challenges. Mattos presented the page on the topic (www.embrapa.br/codigo-florestal) launched by the company and partners with the aim of helping rural producers adapt to the requirements of Law 12.651, of May 25, 2012, which establishes standards for the protection of native vegetation in areas of permanent preservation, legal reserves, restricted use, forestry exploitation and related matters. 

The page presents strategies for recovering areas, experiences and good practices, a list of nurseries, seed producers and vegetative propagation materials, various publications on the subject, audiovisual material, as well as indications of native species that can be used in environmental restoration from different biomes. Currently, information on species from the Cerrado, Atlantic Forest and Pantanal biomes is already available. The updating work, however, is constant and very soon species from the Amazon, Pampa and Caatinga biomes will be included, as well as the WebAmbiente system. This system, the result of a partnership with the Ministry of the Environment, will be made available soon and seeks to assist in decision-making regarding the actions necessary to restore native vegetation in the different national biomes, based on the location and current conditions of the area to be recovered informed by the user. 

During the public hearing, researcher Luciano Mattos also presented information about Embrapa's climate change portfolio, which contains guidelines that indirectly permeate the issue of the Forest Code. “These are projects not directly linked to the code, but which show how sustainable production systems can contribute to the climate change process. Basically, we work with trend analysis, systems modeling, carbon balance and economic, social and environmental sustainability analyses,” he explained. The researcher also passed on information about the set of projects related to gas emissions that Embrapa has been working on over the years (Fluxus, Pecus and Saltus).

Another point highlighted by the specialist was the contribution of integrated systems to reducing gas emissions, such as the Crop Livestock Forest Integration system and agroforestry systems. In this regard, Mattos highlighted the importance of rural credit lines being adapted and, thus, being able to effectively serve farmers. Regarding Climate Risk Zoning, Mattos highlighted the importance of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (Mapa) demanding research on the behavior of crops in mixed systems. 

Public policies – according to the researcher from Embrapa Cerrados, despite the Forest Code having existed for five years, no strong programs related to the theme of environmental services have yet been structured in Brazil, only small projects generally led by the private sector, non-governmental organizations and even some municipal governments and federative units on a pilot basis. “It is important that the country takes advantage of its diversity of experience to design a public policy linked to the new economic and ecological challenges of Brazilian agriculture”, he emphasized. 

The expert clarified that the institution of payment for environmental services should not necessarily be seen as a market instrument. “It is a mechanism to qualify public policies and economically encourage rural development and production systems, in addition to improving environmental governance, which cannot be dissociated from social control.” He clarified that not every environmental services program presupposes direct or indirect payment. In the case of indirect PSA, there is the possibility of tax discounts, ecological rebates on rural credit and differentiated services focused on the provision of environmental services in areas of environmental conservation and productive transition. And other initiatives, such as the Ecological ICMS, add additional environmental criteria that guarantee the provision of environmental services without requiring payment: “The fundamental point is to guarantee the provision of environmental services, regardless of operationalizing corresponding payment”.

Finally, the researcher pointed to the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) as a potential instrument for ecological economic planning of production units, which can guarantee gradual processes of productive transition with the provision of environmental services. He highlighted, however, the need to review overlaps of declared areas and unsuitable documents attached to the National Rural Environmental Registry System (SICAR). “The CAR needs to be checked on area limits and documentation, otherwise a very well-constructed strategy could be rendered unfeasible due to a lack of legal security in the field.” 

Mattos also noted that in a country as unequal as Brazil, direct PSA must be prioritized for family farming, while indirect PSA must be universal, covering all productive categories. “PSA must be seen as a catalyst for innovative production systems, and not as a source of income, as it is not an economic instrument designed to cover the opportunity costs of land”.

Mapa – according to the coordinator of Sustainable Production at the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (Mapa), Elvison Nunes, Brazilian rural producers, in general, have been working hard to adapt to the Forest Code. According to the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR), which already has the registration of 90% of the country's properties or 4,1 million registered properties, Brazil has around 63% of preserved native vegetation. Of these areas, 20% are on rural properties. “This shows the relevant role that rural producers have in this public policy”, he emphasized.

Nunes also reinforced the agricultural sector's commitment over the years to promoting sustainable agriculture and, thus, avoiding the opening of new cultivation areas. According to CAR data, presented by the coordinator, only 9% of Brazil's territorial area is used for grain production. “This is only possible due to the use of a lot of technology in the field”, he pointed out. And to encourage the adoption of some of these technologies, the Mapa coordinator cited the ABC Plan, for low-carbon agriculture, which finances sustainable production activities in the field, with differentiated interest rates. 

There is, however, a need to resolve some obstacles for the program to actually achieve its objectives. Nunes cited, for example, the difficulty that producers have in accessing the ABC Ambiental line. This occurs because the projects to recover permanent preservation areas and legal reserves would not generate income, which would end up making the payment of the loan installments unfeasible. “In this context, payment for environmental services is super important. There is an urgent need for its regulation, so that we can encourage producers more and more. It is important to remember that, at this moment, it is an individual effort. But the benefits reach the entire society,” he said. 

The request for the public hearing was presented by senator Wellington Fagundes. Embrapa was one of the institutions invited to debate the subject alongside representatives from the ministries of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply, Environment, National Confederation of Agriculture and Livestock of Brazil (CNA), Institute for Environmental Research of the Amazon (IPAM) and the University of Brasília (UnB).