At the Belém summit, which ended on Wednesday, Brazil, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela signed a declaration establishing an Alliance Against deforestation. The eight member countries of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (OTCA) have thus reaffirmed the urgency of acting to preserve the forest, which has already lost 17% of its area.
Determining a roadmap for cooperation without setting concrete commitments, particularly in terms of deforestation, the 113-point long text was considered disappointing by many NGOs and observers. But for Marie-Gabrielle Piketty, present in Belém and director of the TerrAmaz project, financed by the AFD, not everything is to be thrown away.
The economist, who fights against deforestation in Colombia, Brazil, Peru and Ecuador with communities and local authorities, explains to the Point why these two days represent for her a “good signal”, by putting “the Amazonians and their concerns at the center”.
Le Point: What conclusions do you draw from these two summit days?
Marie-Gabrielle Piketty: First of all, while the declaration disappoints a lot of people, because it does not contain binding commitments, it must be remembered that ACTO is a cooperative body, there to guide, but not to engage. entry into binding measures. So I have a rather positive view of the statement. It is very broad, which allows it to consider all Amazonian issues, including violence, the question of the participation of indigenous communities, health or regional cooperation.
Far beyond the forest resource alone, it affirms the importance of combining the preservation of natural environments with the improvement of the living conditions of the inhabitants of the Amazon. For me, this is a good signal, because it reminds us of the importance of cooperation and consultation, which are fundamental for the future of the Amazon, while the ACTO was down. .
Do you think this is up to the challenges facing the future of the Amazon rainforest?
It is a difficult question, but, yes, in my opinion, these declarations remain at the height of the stakes, insofar as it was not possible to do more within this framework. It should also be remembered that most of the Amazonian countries present at the summit, with the exception of Brazil, signed the New York Declaration on Forests in 2014, which already included a goal of zero deforestation by 2030. These goals are therefore already at the bottom of the national strategies.
It looks like nothing is happening, but it’s not true, there’s a lot going on. This does not mean that everything is resolved, of course, but I believe that this summit can serve to reinforce and mobilize the positive dynamics underway.
In Belém, the countries recalled that it was necessary to avoid reaching any point of no return (which would correspond, on a local scale, to a threshold of deforestation or degradation from which the forest would produce more carbon than it does not absorb it, editor’s note). Lula also called, and I find this very strong, for consultation with local actors in the Amazon territories.
What to expect?
It seems very important to me to have highlighted the need to work with the governments of the territories, at the level of the governors of States and the prefects of the municipalities in Brazil for example. It is a question of finding solutions together, which make it possible to develop the territories, to settle the question of deforestation, but also to improve the sustainable management of natural resources and living conditions.
Is that what you do, by the way, with TerrAmaz?
Yes, we enter through territories and shared governance, in order to find solutions in consultation, because it is central to addressing deforestation issues. We build databases to support territorial management. We also work with farmers and breeders on all agricultural practices that have been responsible for many degradations in the Amazon, but which can become solutions.
The system of dynamic rotational grazing that we are developing for example with the support of public institutions works well: by dividing the pastures and rotating the cattle, grazing at the right pace, we manage to slightly increase the number of animals per hectare and above all to free up space for the return of the forest.
We manage that these pastures, which were managed in an extensive way and very degraded, support on the contrary a more important animal production, a fodder of better quality, while leaving more room for the forest. Livestock in the Amazon has been criticized, and rightly so, but that’s changing. These improved livestock systems are compatible with protecting forests and restoring degraded lands.
Yes, we have organized a session to provide an update on regenerative cattle farming in the Amazon. Beyond this single session, these dialogues were very rich and intense. Over two days, there were eight plenaries and approximately 400 self-organized sessions, with extremely high turnout and engagement, which impressed me!
It is to the credit of the Brazilian government to have let everyone speak. In itself, managing to mobilize to this extent is already a major success. A series of reports were sent to politicians at the end of these discussions. The statement does not fully include their wealth yet, but many things had no doubt already been discussed beforehand.
Exchanges and cooperation have taken place between countries, and this is what seems to me the most important. This helped to show the magnitude of the Amazonian challenges, and the number of people and institutions ready to work on them in partnership and to bring solutions to them.
