OVER the past few years most of the international focus for fighting climate change has been on the production of fossil fuels.
Destruction of tropical rainforest in South America, Africa and South-East Asia has rather taken a back seat compared with all the arguing over how developed countries in particular should reduce emissions.
It is interesting, therefore, that Brazil has just announced a new fund for tackling the destruction of the Amazon rain forest.
According to Greenpeace this is the first admission by Brazil that rainforest destruction has an impact on climate change.
The Rainforest Fund is intended to assist Brazil to implement various initiatives to conserve areas of rainforest and beef-up enforcement action against illegal logging.
If you take a closer look at Brazil's Amazon problem, there is a paradox in that the government is keen to develop the region and release its untapped wealth.
In opening up the region by providing roads and other infrastructure, the government also opens the way for unscrupulous businesses keen to make a rapid fortune without any regard for the environment.
Enforcing environmental laws can be a practical impossibility given the scale of operations and vastness of the area.
Even instances where successful cases are brought, the fines meted out often remain uncollected.
Through the Rainforest Fund, Brazil hopes to raise $21 billion by 2021. While this seems an enormous figure, it is roughly half the cost of reducing the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide emissions (estimated at $41 billion) and crucially less painful for developed nations already struggling to make reductions in the face of increasing demand for energy and transport.
As with many other environmental issues, the way forward will be to offer the right balance of sticks and carrots to achieve the right outcome.
-------------------------------------
Click here for more Greenwatch.Where are you? Add your pin to the Herald's international readers' map by clicking here.Email the Herald: letters@worthingherald.co.uk
The full article contains 327 words and appears in n/a newspaper.