2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.ncon.2016.03.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A critical analysis of the Native Vegetation Protection Law of Brazil (2012): updates and ongoing initiatives

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
151
0
36

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 236 publications
(188 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
151
0
36
Order By: Relevance
“…This was evidenced by our case study in the Posses subwatershed region in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. This complement of services was indeed foreseen by the Brazilian Forest Act when establishing the Areas of Permanent Protection, where the protection or restoration of native vegetation is mandatory for assuring biodiversity conservation, soil and water resources protection, human well-being, and many other functions (Brancalion, Garcia, et al, 2016a;Metzger, 2010;Soares-Filho et al, 2014). Fortunately, many other restoration projects designed to reestablish riparian forest corridors to comply with the Forest Act have been implemented throughout southeastern Brazil (Brancalion, Schweizer, et al, 2016b;Rodrigues et al, 2011), with consequent increases of landscape connectivity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This was evidenced by our case study in the Posses subwatershed region in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. This complement of services was indeed foreseen by the Brazilian Forest Act when establishing the Areas of Permanent Protection, where the protection or restoration of native vegetation is mandatory for assuring biodiversity conservation, soil and water resources protection, human well-being, and many other functions (Brancalion, Garcia, et al, 2016a;Metzger, 2010;Soares-Filho et al, 2014). Fortunately, many other restoration projects designed to reestablish riparian forest corridors to comply with the Forest Act have been implemented throughout southeastern Brazil (Brancalion, Schweizer, et al, 2016b;Rodrigues et al, 2011), with consequent increases of landscape connectivity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The restoration of thin corridors, which are more susceptible to edge effects (Martello, Andrioli, de Souza, Dodonov, & Ribeiro, 2016;Mendes, Ribeiro, & Galetti, 2015), may provide less functional connectivity of the landscape and thus suboptimal levels of biodiversity conservation services (Brancalion, Garcia, et al, 2016a;Rotta, Viani, & Rosario, 2016). In conclusion, there is great potential for incorporating biodiversity conservation objectives into projects primarily designed and funded for improving the provision of water-related ES, a potential that can be optimized by adopting a landscape ecology perspective in the planning and implementation of ecological restoration efforts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Depois, o texto legal traz uma série de disposições transitórias, que tratam da flexibilização de alguns dos instrumentos gerais de proteção florestal estabelecidos na própria LFB, com vistas a promover, de modo facilitado, a regularização ambiental das propriedades rurais. Por fim, a lei florestal estabelece novos sistemas de controle e de incentivo, que criam mecanismos e políticas públicas para a implementação dos dispositivos legais de proteção e restauração florestal (Brancalion et al, 2016).…”
Section: Introductionunclassified
“…Despite significant increases in revenues derived from agricultural 965 exports in these four countries, millions of their citizens remain undernourished, undereducated, 966 and poor (World Bank, 2017). While Brazil has made important strides in reducing deforestation, 967 decreasing poverty, and fostering science and education with direct positive impacts on primate 968 conservation, a change in government policies in 2012 reduced the protection of natural 969 vegetation on private lands (Brancalion et al, 2016) and laws governing protected areas were 970 reduced and weakened (Bernard et al, 2016). Funding for science also was reduced (Overberch 971 et al, 2018).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%