Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Challenges of Sustainable Forest Operations in Amazonia

  • Forest Engineering (R Picchio, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Forestry Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The goal of this review was to determine what constitutes current challenges in effectively implementing sustainable forest operations in Amazonia. Next, succinctly characterize these challenges into comprehensive well-defined areas. Then ascertain the solutions provided in the literature. Lastly, after a thorough assessment, present potential directions to assist foresters, land managers, researchers, and loggers to build a consensus on what is necessary to achieve sustainable forest operations in Amazonia.

Recent Findings

Illegal logging is a pervasive threat to the credibility of the forest sector with 38% of all logged area in the Brazilian Amazon illegal, which undermines legitimate logging operations through an unfair competitive advantage. One solution is the application of near infrared spectroscopy which has shown promise in determining species and potentially the region of origin. This same technology is also being refined for utilization in species differentiation between logging residues used in green energy, as some industries are species averse, whereas the same species may still be viable for energy generation. Recent models reveal that in the Brazilian Amazon the logging cycle is too short and the cutting intensity too high. Moreover, tree age estimation, which is difficult in many Amazonian species, can now be determined through radiocarbon analysis to determine sustainable cutting cycles.

Summary

Without increased onsite forest inspections and determination of timber origin, illegal logging will continue unabated. Stand damage from logging can easily be reduced through new models and programs that reduce logging infrastructure coverage. To avoid the depletion of timber stocking, the logging cycle must be increased to coincide with the slow growth realities of many species in the Amazon.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Eva HD, Huber OA. Proposal for Defining the Geographic Boundaries of Amazonia: Synthesis of the Results from An Expert Consultation Workshop Organized by the European Commission in Collaboration with the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization—JRC Ispra, 7–8 June 2005; Eva, H.D., Huber, O., Eds.; Office for Official Publications of the European Communities: Luxenbourg, 2005.

  2. MapBiomas. Relátorio Annual de Desmatamento 2022. São Paulo, Brasil; 2023. p. 125. http://alerta.mapbiomas.org. Accessed 3 Sept 2023.

  3. Higuchi N, Jardim FCS, dos Santos J, Barbosa AP, Wood TWW. Bacia 3 – Inventário florestal comercial. Acta Amazon. 1985;15:327–69. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-43921985153369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hendrison J. Damage-controlled logging in managed tropical rain forest in Suriname. The Netherlands: Wageningen Agricultural University; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Silva JNM, de Carvalho JOP, Lopes J do CA, de Almedia BE, Costa DHM, de Oliveira LC, et al. Growth and yield of a tropical rainforest in the Brazilian Amazon 13 years after logging. For Ecol Manag. 1995;71:267–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(94)06106-S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. van der Hout P. Reduced impact logging in the tropical rain forest of Guyana: ecological, economic and silvicultural consequences. The Netherlands: Tropenbos International; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Schöngart J. Growth-Oriented Logging (GOL): A new concept towards sustainable forest management in Central Amazonian várzea floodplains. For Ecol Manag. 2008;256:46–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Andrade VHF, Machado S do A, Filho AF, Botosso PC, Miranda BP, Schöngart J. Growth models for two commercial tree species in upland forests of the Southern Brazilian Amazon. For Ecol Manag. 2019;438:215–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORECO.2019.02.030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. • Ferreira TMC, de Carvalho JOP, Emmert F, Ruschel AR, Nascimento, RGM. How long does the Amazon rainforest take to grow commercially sized trees? An estimation methodology for Manilkara elata (Allemão ex Miq.) Monach. For Ecol Manag. 2020:473:118333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118333. This paper demonstrates the incredibly slow growth rate of a highly sought after commercial timber species, which makes sustainable management challenging.

  10. Gerwing JJ. Degradation of forests through logging and fire in the eastern Brazilian Amazon. For Ecol Manag. 2002;157:131–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00644-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jonkers NR. Tree growth, recruitment and mortality after logging and refinement. In: Werger MJA, editor. Sustainable management of tropical rainforests: The CELOS management system. Paramaribo: Tropenbos International; 2011. p. 46–73.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Amaral MRM, Lima AJ, Higuchi FG, dos Santos J, Higuchi N. Dynamics of tropical forest twenty-five years after experimental logging in central amazon mature forest. Forests. 2019;10:89. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10020089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Johns JS, Barreto P, Uhl C. Logging damage during planned and unplanned logging operations in the eastern Amazon. For Ecol Manag. 1996;89:59–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03869-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pereira R, Zweede J, Asner GP, Keller M. Forest canopy damage and recovery in reduced-impact and conventional selective logging in eastern Para Brazil. For Ecol Manag. 2002;168:77–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00732-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Holmes TP, Blate GM, Zweede JC, Pereira R, Barreto P, Boltz F, et al. Financial and ecological indicators of reduced impact logging performance in the eastern Amazon. For Ecol Manag. 2002;163:93–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00530-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Verissimo A, Barreto P, Mattos M, Tarifa R, Uhl C. Logging impacts and prospects for sustainable forest management in an old Amazonian frontier: The case of Paragominas. For Ecol Manag. 1992;55:169–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(92)90099-U.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jonkers NR, Hendrison J. The CELOS Management System: concept, treatments and costs. In: Werger MJA, editor. Sustainable management of tropical rainforests: The CELOS management system. Paramaribo: Tropenbos International; 2011. p. 29–45.

    Google Scholar 

  18. de Graaf NR, van Eldik T. Precious Woods, Brazil. In: Werger MJA, editor. Sustainable management of tropical rainforests: The CELOS management system. Paramaribo: Tropenbos International; 2011. p. 186–99.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Barreto P, Amaral P, Vidal E, Uhl C. Costs and benefits of forest management for timber production in eastern Amazonia. For Ecol Manag. 1998;108:9–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(97)00251-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sist P, Ferreira FN. Sustainability of reduced-impact logging in the Eastern Amazon. For Ecol Manag. 2007;243:199–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2007.02.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Macpherson AJ, Carter DR, Schulze MD, Vidal E, Lentini MW. The sustainability of timber production from Eastern Amazonian forests. Land Use Policy. 2012;29:339–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2011.07.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Piponiot C, Rödig E, Putz FE, Rutishauser E, Sist P, Ascarrunz N, et al. Can timber provision from Amazonian production forests be sustainable? Environ Res Lett. 2019;14: 064014. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab195e.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. Roopsind A, Caughlin TT, van der Hout P, Arets E, Putz FE. Trade-offs between carbon stocks and timber recovery in tropical forests are mediated by logging intensity. Glob Change Biol. 2018;24:2862–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14155.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. Roopsind A, Wortel V, Hanoeman W, Putz FE. Quantifying uncertainty about forest recovery 32-years after selective logging in Suriname. For Ecol Manag. 2017;391:246–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2017.02.026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. •• Sist P, Piponiot C, Kanashiro M, Peña-Claros M, Putz FE, Schulze M, et al. Sustainability of Brazilian forest concessions. For Ecol Manag. 2021;496: 119440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119440. This paper takes a modeling approach to determine various cutting intensities and logging cycles in Brazilian forest concessions. However, in the authors’ opinion, this work should be considered, evaluated, and repeated throughout Amazonia, as the current practice in Brazilian concessions is not sustainable long-term beyond the first or second logging entry, which may also be the case in other regions as well.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Neves RLP, Schwartz G, Lopes J do CA, Leão FM. Post-harvesting silvicultural treatments in canopy logging gaps: Medium-term responses of commercial tree species under tending and enrichment planting. For Ecol Manag. 2019;451:117521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. DeArmond D, Emmert F, Lima AJN, Higuchi N. Impacts of soil compaction persist 30 years after logging operations in the Amazon Basin. Soil Till Res. 2019;189:207–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2019.01.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. DeArmond D, Ferraz JBS, de Souza CAS, Corrêa C, Spanner GC, Lima AJN, dos Santos J, Higuchi N. Impacts to soil Properties still evident 27 years after abandonment in Amazonian log landings. For Ecol Manag. 2022;510: 120105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Pinto RC, Pinheiro C, Vidal E, Schwartz G. Technical and financial evaluation of enrichment planting in logging gaps with the high-value species Swietenia macrophylla and Handroanthus serratifolius in the Eastern Amazon. For Ecol Manag. 2021;495: 119380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. • DeArmond D, Emmert F, Pinto ACM, Lima AJN, Higuchi N. A systematic review of logging impacts in the Amazon Biome. Forests. 2023;14:81. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14010081. This review covers a wide range of the impacts from logging that occur throughout the Amazon biome, such as those to wildlife, streams, and the forest stand.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schwartz G, Pereira PCG, Siviero MA, Pereira JF, Ruschel AR, Yared JAG. Enrichment planting in logging gaps with Schizolobium parahyba var. amazonicum (Huber ex Ducke) Barneby: A financially profitable alternative for degraded tropical forests in the Amazon. For Ecol Manag. 2017;390:166–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2017.01.031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Santos de Lima L, Merry F, Soares-Filho B, Rodrigues HO, Damaceno C dos S, Bauch MA. Illegal logging as a disincentive to the establishment of a sustainable forest sector in the Amazon. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0207855. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207855.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Imazon. Sistema de Monitoramento da Exploração Madeireira (Simex): Mapeamento da exploração madeireira na Amazônia – agosto 2020 a julho 2021. Belém: Imazon, Idesam, Imaflora e ICV. 2022.

  34. Condé TM, Higuchi N, Lima AJN. Illegal selective logging and forest fires in the northern Brazilian Amazon. Forests. 2019;10:61. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10010061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. • Alarcón-Aguirre JS, Aguirre-Mejía PM, Palacios-Hinestroza H, Sulbarán-Rangel B. Evaluation of the forestry administrative system that regulates the activity of extracting wood from the Northern Ecuadorian amazon. Land Use Policy. 2020;99:104852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104852. This paper covers how illegal would enters the system in Ecuador.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Brancalion PHS, de Almeida DRA, Vidal E, Molin PG, Sontag VE, Souza SEXF, et al. Fake legal logging in the Brazilian amazon. Sci Adv. 2018:4(8). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat1192.

  37. Andrade KDC, dos Santos APF, Emmert F, dos Santos J, Lima AJN, Higuchi N. Volumetric yield coefficient: the key to regulating virtual credits for Amazon wood. Acta Amazon. 2023;53:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4392202101602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Silva DC, Pastore TCM, Soares LF, de Barros FAS, Bergo MCJ, Coradin VTH, et al. Determination of the country of origin of true mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla King) wood in five Latin American countries using handheld NIR devices and multivariate data analysis. Holzforschung. 2018;72:521–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/hf-2017-0160.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. • Novaes TV, Ramalho FMG, da Silva AE, Lima MDR, da Silva MG, Ferreira GC, et al. Discrimination of Amazonian forest species by NIR spectroscopy: wood surface effects. Eur J Wood Prod. 2023;81:159–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-022-01862-y. This paper evaluates the ability to identify Amazonian species with a near infrared spectrometer and multivariate statistics to high degree of certainty, which could be a valuable tool in the hands of forest inspectors.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Javier-Astete R, Melo J, Jimenez-Davalos J, Zolla G. Classification of Amazonian fast-growing tree species and wood chemical determination by FTIR and multivariate analysis (PLS-DA-PLS). Sci Reports. 2023;13:7827. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-35107-6.

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Jokura T. New tool to track forest products. Revista Pesquisa FAPESP. 2023:328. https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/em/new-tools-to-track-forest-products/. Accessed 3 Sept 2023.

  42. Carry I, Maihold G: Illegal logging, timber laundering and the global illegal timber trade. In: Brombacher D, Maihold G, Müller M, Vorrath J, editors. Geopolitics of the illicit: Linking the Global South and Europe. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. Kg; 2022.

  43. Lowman M. Life in the treetops–An overview of forest canopy science and its future directions. Plants People Planet. 2020;3:16–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. González NC, Kröger M. The adoption of earth-observation technologies for deforestation monitoring by Indigenous people: evidence from the Amazon. Globalizations. 2023;20:415–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2022.2093556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Darrigo MR, dos Santos FAM, Venticinque EM. The confounding effects of logging on tree seedling growth and herbivory in Central Amazon. Biotropica. 2018;50:60–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. d’Oliveira MVN, Figueiredo EO, de Almeida DRA, Oliveira LC, Silva CA, Nelson BW, et al. Impacts of selective logging on Amazon forest canopy structure and biomass with a LiDAR and photogrammetric survey sequence. For Ecol Manag. 2021;500: 119648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. DeArmond D, Ferraz JBS, Emmert F, Lima AJN, Higuchi N. An assessment of soil compaction after logging operations in Central Amazonia. For Sci. 2020;66:230–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/forsci/fxz070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Keller G, Sherar J, Zweede J. Overview of Amazon Basin Forest Roads Manual. Transp Res Rec. 2015;2472:56–63. https://doi.org/10.3141/2472-07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Jacobsen RHF, Sccoti MSV, Fagundes STS, de Brito Junior JF, Biazatti SC. Impacts on vegetation after selective cutting in forest concession area in the Southwestern Brazilian Amazon. Floresta. 2020;50:1778–87. https://doi.org/10.5380/rf.v50i4.65680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Condé TM, Tonini H, Higuchi N, Higuchi FG, Lima AJN, Barbosa RI, et al. Effects of sustainable forest management on tree diversity, timber volumes, and carbon stocks in an ecotone forest in the northern Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy. 2022;119: 106145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Dionisio LFS, Schwartz G, Lopes J do C, Oliveira F de A. Growth, mortality, and recruitment of tree species in an Amazonian rainforest over 13 years of reduced impact logging. For Ecol Manag. 2018;430:150–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORECO.2018.08.024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Gaui TD, Costa FRC, de Souza FC, Amaral MRM, de Carvalho DC, Reis FQ, et al. Long-term effect of selective logging on floristic composition: A 25 year experiment in the Brazilian Amazon. For Ecol Manag. 2019;440:258–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.02.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. DeArmond D, Ferraz JBS, Marra DM, Amaral MRM, Lima AJN, Higuchi N. Logging intensity affects growth and lifespan trajectories for pioneer species in Central Amazonia. For Ecol Manag. 2022;2022(522): 120450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Worbes M, Schöngart J. Measures for sustainable forest management in the tropics – A tree-ring based case study on tree growth and forest dynamics in a Central Amazonian lowland moist forest. PLoS ONE. 2019;14: e0219770. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219770.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. de Miranda DLC, Higuchi N, Trumbore SE, Latorraca JVF, do Carmo JF, Lima AJN. Using radiocarbon-calibrated dendrochronology to improve tree-cutting cycle estimates for timber management in southern Amazon forests. Trees. 2018;32:587–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-018-1658-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Hogan JA, Hérault B, Bachelot B, Gorel A, Jounieaux M, Baraloto C. Understanding the recruitment response of juvenile Neotropical trees to logging intensity using functional traits. Ecol Appl. 2018;28:1998–2010. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1776.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Castro T da C, de Carvalho JOP, Schwartz G, Silva JNM, Ruschel AR, de Freitas LJM, et al. The continuous timber production over cutting cycles in the Brazilian Amazon depends on volumes of species not harvested in previous cuts. For Ecol Manag. 2021;490:119124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Tegegne YT, Van Brusselen J, Cramm M, Linhares-Juvenal T, Pacheco P, Sabogal C, et al. Making forest concessions in the tropics work to achieve the 2030 Agenda: Voluntary Guidelines. FAO Forestry Paper No. 180. Rome: FAO; 2018.

  59. • Ribeiro JR, Azevedo-Ramos C, dos Santos RBN. Impact of forest concessions on local jobs in central amazon. Trees For People. 2020;2: 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2020.100021. This work focuses on the employment provided to local communities from logging concessions. The authors found that there were indeed economic benefits to the surrounding communities.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Medina G, Pokorny B. Financial assessment of community forest management: lessons from a cross-sectional study of timber management systems in the Brazilian Amazon. Int For Rev. 2022;24:197–207. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554822835629541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. • Bousfield CG, Massam MR, Acosta IA, Peres CA, Edwards DP. Land-sharing logging is more profitable than land sparing in the Brazilian Amazon. Environ Res Lett. 2021;16: 114002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2b5f. This paper assesses the profitability of logging concessions when varying degrees of no harvest blocks are set aside within the logging concession.

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Bousfield CG, Massam MR, Peres CA, Edwards DP. Carbon payments can cost-effectively improve logging sustainability in the Amazon. J Environ Manag. 2022;314: 115094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Goodman RC, Aramburu MH, Gopalakrishna T, Putz FE, Gutiérrez N, Alvarez JLM, et al. Carbon emissions and potential emissions reductions from low-intensity selective logging in southwestern Amazonia. For Ecol Manag. 2019;439:18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.02.037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. • Rico-Straffon J, Wang Z, Panlasigui S, Loucks CJ, Swenson J, Pfaff A. Forest concessions and eco-certifications in the Peruvian Amazon: Deforestation impacts of logging rights and logging restrictions. J Environ Econ Manag. 2023;118: 102780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2023.102780. In evaluating the effectiveness of logging concessions impacts on forest loss, both certified and uncertified concessions were considered important avenues for preventing forest loss.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Isaac Júnior MA, Barbosa BHG, Gomide LR, Calegario N, Figueiredo EO, Filho LOM, et al. Reduced-Impact Logging By Allocating Log-Decks Using Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm in Western Amazon. Rev Arvore. 2021;45: e4506. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-908820210000006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. da Silva PH, Gomide LR, Figueiredo EO, de Carvalho LMT, Ferraz-Filho AC. Optimal selective logging regime and log landing location models: a case study in the Amazon forest. Acta Amazon. 2018;48:18–27. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4392201603113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Aguiar MO, da Silva GF, Mauri GR, da Silva EF, de Mendonca AR, Martins Silva JP, et al. Metaheuristics applied for storage yards allocation in an Amazonian sustainable forest management area. J Environ Manag. 2020;271: 110196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Silva EF, da Silva GF, Figueiredo EO, de Mendonça AR, Santana CJ do O, Fiedler NC, et al. Optimized forest planning: allocation of log storage yards in the Amazonian sustainable forest management area. For Ecol Manag. 2020;472:118231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Sales A, Gonzales DGE, Martins TGV, Silva GCC, Spletozer AG, Telles LA de A, et al. Optimization of Skid Trails and Log Yards on the Amazon Forest. Forests. 2019;10:252. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10030252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. • Kazama VS, Corte APD, Robert RCG, Sanquetta CR, Arce JE, Oliveira-Nascimento KA, et al. Global review on forest road optimization planning: Support for sustainable forest management in Amazonia. For Ecol Manag. 2021;492: 119159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119159. This review article provides valuable information on the various techniques and methods for forest road optimization that would be useful for foresters and land managers alike in reducing overall road construction.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Mollinari MM, Peres CA, Edwards DP. Rapid recovery of thermal environment after selective logging in the Amazon. Agric For Meteorol. 2019;278: 107637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.107637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Barni PE, Rego ACM, Silva F das CF, Lopes RAS, Xaud HAM, Xaud MR, Barbosa RI, Fearnside PM. Logging Amazon forest increased the severity and spread off fires during the 2015–2016 El Niño. Forest Ecology and Management. 2021;500:119652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. • Brandão PC, de Souza AL, Rousset P, Simas FNB, de Mendonça BAF. Forest biomass as a viable pathway for sustainable energy supply in isolated villages of Amazonia. Environ Dev. 2021;2021(37): 100609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2020.100609. This paper considers the energy needs of Amazonian communities. Biomass energy production was compared with diesel generated production and found to be competitive and cleaner for the environment, while at the same time reducing the importation of fossil fuels.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Morais WWC, Brito JO, Lana AQ, Dias AF, Morais JBF. Investigating waste generated from logging in the Amazon for energy use. Sci For. 2021;49: e3712. https://doi.org/10.18671/scifor.v49n132.15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Lima MDR, Simetti R, de Assis MR, Trugilho PF, Carneiro A de CO, Bufalino L, et al. Charcoal of logging wastes from sustainable forest management for industrial and domestic uses in the Brazilian Amazonia. Biomass Bioenerg. 2020;142:105804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105804.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Lima MDR, Trugilho PF, Bufalino L, Dias Júnior AF, Ramalho FMG, Protásio T de P, et al. Efficiency of near-infrared spectroscopy in classifying Amazonian wood wastes for bioenergy generation. Biomass Bioenerg. 2022;166:106617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2022.106617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. • Lima MDR, Patrício EPS, Barros Junior U de O, Silva R de CC, Bufalino L, Numazawa S, et al. Colorimetry as a criterion for segregation of logging wastes from sustainable forest management in the Brazilian Amazon for bioenergy. Renew Energ. 2021;2021(163):792–806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.08.078. This paper evaluates the utilization of colometry to determine the differences in logging waste used for bioenergy in the form of chips and charcoal. The authors suggest that the use of onsite portable colometry devices could be used to quickly facilitate the grouping of logging residues.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Moreira LDS, Andrade FWC, Balboni BM, Moutinho VHP. Wood from forest residues: technological properties and potential uses of branches of three species from Brazilian Amazon. Sustainability. 2022;14:11176. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Moreira LDS, Lima JT, Soares BCD, Moutinho VHP. Wood quality of residual branches of Hymenaea courbaril L. from logging in the Amazon rainforest. Holzforschung. 2023;77:16–27. https://doi.org/10.1515/hf-2022-0084.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. • Numazawa CTD, Krasovskiy A, Kraxner F, Pietsch SA. Logging residues for charcoal production through forest management in the Brazilian Amazon: economic gains and forest regrowth effects. Environ Res Lett. 2020;15:2000–10. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abb495. The authors determined through modeling that the use of logging residues for charcoal production could increase the profitability of logging operations to a considerable degree.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Trindade ADS, Ferraz JBS, DeArmond D. Removal of woody debris from logging gaps influences soil physical and chemical properties in the short term: A case study in Central Amazonia. For Sci. 2021;67:711–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/forsci/fxab045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Sessions J. Harvesting Operations in the Tropics. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2007.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  83. Lima KS, Castro ACM, Baptista JS, Silva U. Wood-logging process management in Eastern Amazonia (Brazil). Sustainability. 2020;12:7571. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Eleuterio AA, de Jesus MA, Putz FE. Stem decay in live trees: heartwood hollows and termites in five timber species in Eastern Amazonia. Forests. 2020;11:1087. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11101087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Cedergren J, Falck J, Garcia A, Goh F, Hagner M. Feasibility and usefulness of directional felling in a tropical rain forest. J Trop For Sci. 2002;14:179–90.

    Google Scholar 

  86. • Oliveira-Nascimento KA, Higuchi N, DeArmond D, Robert RCG, Arce JE, Carvalho JPF. Environmental thermal conditions related to performance, dynamics and safety of logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Croat J For Eng. 2021;42:419–35. https://doi.org/10.5552/crojfe.2021.865. This study evaluates the working conditions of logging crews in the humid forest environment. The results of this were utilized by the timber company to institute scheduled work breaks for the logging crews.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Yovi EY, Yamada Y. Strategy to disseminate occupational safety and health information to forestry workers: the felling safety game. J Tropic Forest Sci. 2015;2:213–21. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43582386. Accessed 3 Sept 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Bunting P, Rosenqvist A, Hilarides L, Lucas RM, Thomas N, Tadono T, et al. Global mangrove extent change 1996–2020: Global Mangrove Watch Version 3.0. Remote Sens. 2022;14:3657. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14153657.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  89. Rovai AS, Twilley RR, Castañeda-Moya E, Midway SR, Friess DA, Trettin CC, et al. Macroecological patterns of forest structure and allometric scaling in mangrove forests. Global Ecol Biogeogr. 2021;30:1000–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Rovai AS, Riul P, Twilley RR, Castañeda-Moya E, Rivera-Monroy VH, Williams AA, et al. Scaling mangrove aboveground biomass from site-level to continental-scale. Global Ecol Biogeogr. 2016;25:286–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Hayashi SN, Souza-Filho PWM, Nascimento WR, Fernandes MEB. The effect of anthropogenic drivers on spatial patterns of mangrove land use on the Amazon coast. PLoS ONE. 2018;14:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217754.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Menezes MPM, Berger U, Mehlig U. Mangrove vegetation in Amazonia: A review of studies from the coast of Pará and Maranhão States, north Brazil. Acta Amazon. 2008;38:403–19. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0044-59672008000300004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Kauffman JB, Bernardino AF, Ferreira TO, Giovannoni LR, de Gomes LEO, Romero DJ, et al. Carbon stocks of mangroves and salt marshes of the Amazon region. Brazil Biol Lett. 2018;14:20180208. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2018.0208.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. • Rovai AS, Twilley RR, Worthington TA, Riul P. Brazilian mangroves: Blue carbon hotspots of national and global relevance to natural climate solutions. Front For Glob Change. 2022;4: 787533. https://doi.org/10.3389/ffgc.2021.787533. This review is a comprehensive assessment of above- and belowground biomass and soil organic stocks for mangroves along the Brazilian coast, which includes the Amazonian states of Pará and Amapá.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. de Oliveira-Filho RR, Rovai AS, Menghini RP, Coehlo Júnior C, Novelli YS, Cintrón G. On the impact of the Brazilian Forest Code on mangroves: A comment to Ferreira and Lacerda (2016). Ocean Coast Manage. 2016;132:36–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.08.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Grasel D, Fearnside PM, Rovai AS, Vitule JRS, Rodrigues RR, Mormul RP, et al. Brazil’s native vegetation protection law jeopardizes wetland conservation: A comment on Maltchik et al. Environ Conserv. 2019;46:121–3. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892918000474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Glaser M, Berger U, Macedo R. Local vulnerability as an advantage: mangrove forest management in Pará state, north Brazil, under conditions of illegality. Reg Environ Change. 2003;3:162–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-003-0057-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Goldberg L, Lagomasino D, Thomas N, Fatoyinbo T. Global declines in human-driven mangrove loss. Glob Change Biol. 2020;26:5844–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15275.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  99. Sippo JZ, Sanders CJ, Santos IR, Jeffrey LC, Call M, Harada Y, et al. Coastal carbon cycle changes following mangrove loss. Limnol Oceanogr. 2020;65:2642–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11476.

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Jeffrey LC, Reithmaier G, Sippo JZ, Johnston SG, Tait DR, Harada Y, et al. Are methane emissions from mangrove stems a cryptic carbon loss pathway? Insights from a catastrophic forest mortality. New Phytol. 2019;224:146–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15995.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Barros AC, Uhl C. Logging along the Amazon River and estuary: Patterns, problems and potential. For Ecol Manag. 1995;77:87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(95)03574-T.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Fortini LB, Cropper WP, Zarin DJ. Modeling the complex impacts of timber harvests to find optimal management regimes for Amazon tidal floodplain forests. PLoS ONE. 2015;10: e0136740. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136740.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Fortini L. Integrated models show a transient opportunity for sustainable management by tropical forest dwellers. For Ecol Manag. 2019;438:233–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.02.022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Miranda ZP, Guedes MC, Rosa SA, Schöngart J. Volume increment modeling and subsidies for the management of the tree Mora paraensis (Ducke) Ducke based on the study of growth rings. Trees. 2018;32:277–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-017-1630-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. •• Cromberg M, Cronkleton P, Menton M, Sears RR. Challenges to smallholder forestry policy reform on a post- industrial logging frontier: lessons from the Amazon estuary. Int For Rev. 2022;25:75–90. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554823836902617. A case study in the Amazon estuary of forest policy reform that was implemented for smallholder timber production and harvesting. Although not successful due to an overburdensome bureaucracy, valuable lessons can still be learned for future reform implementation.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Ferreira LV, Cunha DA, Parolin P. Effects of logging on Virola surinamensis in an Amazonian floodplain forest. Environ Conserv J. 2014;15:1–8. https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.2014.15301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Junk WJ, Wittmann F, Schöngart J, Piedade MTF. A classification of the major habitats of Amazonian black-water river floodplains and a comparison with their white-water counterparts. Wet Ecol Manag. 2015;23:677–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-015-9412-8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Rosa SA, Barbosa ACMC, Junk WJ, da Cunha CN, Piedade MTF, Scabin AB, et al. Growth models based on tree-ring data for the Neotropical tree species Calophyllum brasiliense across different Brazilian wetlands: implications for conservation and management. Trees. 2017;31:729–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-016-1503-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Schöngart J, de Queiroz HL. Traditional timber harvesting in the Central Amazonian Floodplains. In: Junk W, Piedade M, Wittmann F, Schöngart J, Parolin P editors. Amazonian Floodplain Forests. Dordrecht: Springer; 2010. p. 419–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8725-6_20.

  110. da Fonseca Júnior SF, Piedade MTF, Schöngart J. Wood growth of Tabebuia barbata (E. Mey.) Sandwith (Bignoniaceae) and Vatairea guianensis Aubl. (Fabaceae) in Central Amazonian black-water (igapó) and white-water (várzea) floodplain forests. Trees. 2009;23:127–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-008-0261-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratório de Manejo Florestal, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisa da Amazônia, Av. André Araújo, 2.936 Petrópolis, 69011-970, Manaus, AM, Brasil

    Daniel DeArmond & Niro Higuchi

  2. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vickburg, MS, 39180, USA

    Andre Rovai

  3. Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences, 3201 Energy, Coast & Environment Bldg., Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803, USA

    Andre Rovai

  4. Forestry Division, Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS), 1-1 Ohwashi, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8686, Japan

    Rempei Suwa

Authors
  1. Daniel DeArmond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andre Rovai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rempei Suwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Niro Higuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Author contributions D.D. was responsible for conceptualization, methodology, and writing the original draft. A.R. and R.S. were responsible for writing, review and editing. NH was responsible for review and project supervision. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel DeArmond.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Conflict of Interest

Daniel DeArmond declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Andre Rovai declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Rempei Suwa declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Niro Higuchi declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

DeArmond, D., Rovai, A., Suwa, R. et al. The Challenges of Sustainable Forest Operations in Amazonia. Curr. For. Rep. 10, 77–88 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-023-00210-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-023-00210-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation