Brazil - Forests in the Balance : Challenges of Conservation with Development
This case study is one of six evaluations of the implementation of the World Bank's 1991 Forest Strategy. This and the other cases (Cameroon, China, Costa Rica, India, and Indonesia) complement a review of the entire set of lending and nonlend...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Publication |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2010/01/20153705/brazil-forests-balance-challenges-conservation-development http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19907 |
| Summary: | This case study is one of six
evaluations of the implementation of the World Bank's
1991 Forest Strategy. This and the other cases (Cameroon,
China, Costa Rica, India, and Indonesia) complement a review
of the entire set of lending and nonlending activities of
the World Bank Group and the Global Environment Facility.
The World Bank has clearly diminished its lending presence
in the Amazon in the past decade. It has moved from the
"big projects" era of the 1960s through the 1980s
and strong economic and sector work to a more careful
approach at the end of the century with attempts once again
to focus on strategic issues and smaller projects, including
pilot activities. This seems due both to the poor
performance of earlier projects-which prompted a more
risk-adverse Bank strategy following the intense
international scrutiny and criticism contributing to the
cautious approach urged by the 1991 Forest Strategy-and to a
lack of demand in Brazil for Bank funds. Brazil's
macroeconomic difficulties-its balance of payments and
fiscal deficits-have led the government to be selective as
well as to shift lending to quick-disbursing activities.
This is evident in the most recent land reform programs.
Controlling deforestation is not easy given the large number
and level of national and global forces and actors affecting
it. If the Bank is to be a facilitator for balancing the
needs of stakeholders (i.e., the poor and the indigenous
people) and national and global interests, it must be seen
as an objective bystander. The 1991 Forest Strategy
emphasizes the primacy of the rights of the indigenous
people-and by implication their rights have primacy over
those of the local poor. But the Bank cannot be a
facilitator unless it is viewed by both parties as not
serving the interests of only one party. |
|---|