With Lula in power, NGOs should regain relevance in the Amazon

In 2019, months after Jair Bolsonaro assumed the Presidency of the Republic, the Norwegian government announced that it would stop transferring resources to the Amazon Fund, created during the Lula government in 2008 to help finance the preservation of the rainforest. The impact would not be small: the Norwegians had been responsible for more than 90% of the value of the fund, which had received around R$ 3 billion since 2008. With the victory of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) in the presidential race in October Last year, the government of Norway promised to resume donations to the fund, whose resources are redistributed, in part, to organizations that work in the Amazon region.

Norway’s change in posture reveals the international view of the new Brazilian government: the PT administration, historically closer to environmentalist and indigenist NGOs than to right-wing groups, should encourage, directly or indirectly, a greater protagonism by non-governmental organizations. governmental. And this can bring more problems than benefits.

accelerated growth

Brazil has 815,676 NGOs registered according to the most recent survey of the Map of OSCIPs organized by the Institute of Applied Economic Research (IPEA) – OSCIP is the acronym for Civil Society Organizations, the formal name for what is conventionally called an NGO. Of this total, 55,871 work in the North region. Mato Grosso, which is also part of the legal Amazon, has 63,154. Overall, the increase was 54% in a decade: in 2010, Brazil had around 530,000 OSCIPs.

The data are not completely accurate because they include a large number of churches, which is outside the classic definition of an NGO. On the other hand, there are thousands of non-governmental organizations that have not registered as OSCIP and, therefore, do not enter the IPEA classification. In any case, the numbers help to dimension the size of the challenge that is to supervise the functioning of these entities, many of which are financed by foreign governments.

money comes out

An example of the power of NGOs in the Amazon is the role played by the Instituto Socioambiental (ISA). Founded in 1994, the entity has become one of the main influences in the public debate on the subject.

An analysis of the institute’s accounts shows that most of the money comes from outside the country. In 2020, ISA had revenue of BRL 67.9 million. Of these resources, R$ 59.5 million (87.6%) came from foreign sources, according to the entity’s balance sheet.

Among the main funders of the ISA are the government of Norway, the European Union and CAFOD, an arm of the Catholic Church in the United Kingdom. Greenpeace, the OAK Foundation, Procter & Gamble and Penguin Random House are also among the donors.

But ISA is no exception – several other non-governmental organizations support themselves with foreign money. For example: in 2021, Instituto Clima e Sociedade had a balance of BRL 166.8 million obtained in donations. Of these, more than 99% came from outside Brazil. The list includes the governments of Germany and the United Kingdom, as well as foundations of companies such as the American group Walmart and the Swedish IKEA. It is no exaggeration to say that, without the injection of foreign resources, the NGO would have many difficulties in surviving.

A third NGO that operates in the Amazon, Imazon, had revenues of R$ 13.6 million in 2020. The entity’s second largest donor is the Instituto Clima e Sociedade. Number 1 on the list is the government of Norway.

billionaire cashier

Officially, the Amazon Fund only deals with issues of the environment and sustainable economic development and initiatives of “ecological-economic zoning, territorial ordering and land regularization.”

Since it was created, the fund has financed 102 projects and invested a total of R$1.7 billion (there is still R$1.5 billion in cash). While 93.8% of the total donations received since 2008 came from the Norwegian government, the German government contributed 5.7%.

Just through one of its arms, Norad, the Norwegian government financed between 2001 and 2021 574 projects in Brazil, with transfers totaling approximately R$ 5.7 billion. Data were obtained from the annual balance sheets of the organizations cited. In them, organizations disclose the total income and expenses of the previous year. Most bring only a generic description of the projects — or not even that.

Lack of transparency of NGOs in the Amazon

As the numbers make clear, a significant portion of the most influential NGOs operating in the Amazon survive on public funds, while others feed on foreign donations.

In the first case, the biggest risk is that of corruption. Fifteen years ago, the CPI on NGOs, in the Senate, investigated the diversion of public resources through transfers to these organizations. Initially, the focus was on acts of corruption committed during the Lula government. But the investigated period was expanded and started to cover from 1999 to 2009. With an extensive volume of accusations to be investigated, the CPI lasted more than three years, but ended up ending without a final report being approved.

In the second case, the biggest problem is the possibility of foreign governments and entities trying to interfere in Brazilian sovereignty. The CPI’s final report on NGOs itself includes a manifestation by the Ministry of Defense according to which NGOs operating in the Amazon “receive support from the international media, with the aim of restricting the presence and legitimacy of the Brazilian State in the Amazon region.”

And the Amazon really seems to be the focus of foreign resources that supply these organizations based in Brazil. There, far from the spotlight, many of them claim that they promote actions with the objective of assisting indigenous people, ensuring the preservation of traditional cultures and protecting the forest.

tares and wheat

For the anthropologist Edward Luz, who works in the indigenous cause, non-governmental organizations should not be placed in a single basket. He says that many NGOs present in the Amazon do a serious job and that it allows an adequate monitoring of their actions. He mentions the Tamar Project as an example, which seeks to protect sea turtles. “These are NGOs with very low potential for geopolitical articulation. The most they will be able to do is articulate for a new conservation unit, ask for resources abroad”, he says, before adding: “In this case, the Brazilian State manages to monitor with a high degree of transparency and monitoring how many turtles were saved. ”

The problem, he says, is NGOs that use minorities, such as indigenous people, to promote hidden interests. “It is not possible to know if the money that came from Brussels or Paris will be used to rescue the identity of the

indigenous peoples, buy votes from them or create a new indigenous land in Brazil”, explains Edward. And, as an anthropologist who has worked for the National Foundation of Indigenous Peoples (Funai) in processes of demarcation of indigenous lands, he has experience in the matter.

To illustrate his argument, Edward mentions the halt in the construction of Ferrogrão, a railroad that will allow a faster flow of soy produced in Mato Grosso. If it gets off the ground, the railroad will run along the BR-163, practically without deforestation. Even so, ISA articulated protests and lobbying actions against the initiative. “ISA received millions of dollars to prevent the construction of this highway using its socio-environmental instruments”, he says.

Former Funai employee and PhD in sustainable development, Josiana Santos says that the work of NGOs in the Amazon sometimes makes indigenous people chronically dependent. Therefore, a reduction in the influence of these organizations with indigenous people — although desirable — needs to be gradual. “Taking NGOs away from indigenous people who depend on them in everything would be a weaning process. Making them understand that they need to have autonomy, protagonism and develop a means of survival without these entities is something that is necessary”, she says.

In Josiana’s opinion, it is no accident that NGOs end up making indigenous people dependent. “The more dependent indigenous communities are, the better it is for them [as organizações
não-governamentais]also because that way they manage to show their vulnerability and attract financiers”, he explains.

Proposal relegated

The final report of the CPI on NGOs, which had almost 1,500 pages and was prepared by then senator Inácio Arruda (PCdoB-CE), stated that the legislation on non-governmental organizations needed to be improved so that there was more transparency. “It is necessary to advance in the structuring and creation of mechanisms so that the State can be able to supervise and verify the effectiveness of the signed agreements, which also depends on a new and comprehensive regulatory framework”, said the text.

Edward Luz believes that, more than a decade later, almost nothing has changed: Brazil remains unprepared to adequately deal with abuses committed by (or through) NGOs. “No new legislation or technical norm from the federal government has been released in this sense”, he says. For him, the Executive needs to expand its intelligence capacity to identify which NGOs are being used to practice corruption and defend foreign interests. He also defends the creation of a new CPI of NGOs, with no deadline to end. Without this, he claims, the country’s sovereignty in the Amazon region will continue to be threatened.