Ericson M. Scorsim. Lawyer and Public Law Consultant. PhD in Law from the University of São Paulo. Co-founder of the Anti-Noise Environmental Monitoring Association. Author of the ebook “Cities Free of Noise Pollution,” published on Amazon in 2022.
The environmental issue is existential for Brazil and Brazilians. The fundamental and environmental rights of future and current generations are at risk. This is a time for widespread environmental awareness, especially now at the historic moment of the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 30), to be held in Brazil. Climate change and global warming demand urgent adaptation measures. In 2020, the coronavirus pandemic caused tragedy, killing millions of people in Brazil and around the world. This pandemic demonstrated that a biological agent has the power to kill millions and generate countless diseases. Hence the need to devise measures to protect the biosafety of cities and their populations. Furthermore, the fires and burning that occurred in Brazil in 2024, with smoke reaching practically all Brazilian cities, demand preventive measures to prevent this damage from occurring again. There are immense risks from droughts and water shortages for the population. Consider the case of the droughts in the Amazon and the Pantanal, which are of impressive magnitude. In 2024, floods hit Rio Grande do Sul, causing massive damage. Meanwhile, Brazilian beaches have been polluted year after year. Air quality has been worsening year after year. Noise pollution is also a factor in degrading environmental quality and quality of life, posing risks to public health. Chemical pollution is present in food and products; not even the population is aware of this chemical contamination. Soil pollution is a chronic problem. Plastic pollution contaminates the oceans. Forests are being lost, and they are being destroyed year after year. The environmental institutional paradigm is not suited to the urgent demands of environmental protection. The design of environmental law must ensure the efficiency, effectiveness, and effectiveness of environmental protection. Finally, the design of environmental law must ensure effective environmental competence in environmental protection. Furthermore, the environmental agency’s composition should include renowned scientists in their fields: air pollution, chemical pollution, noise pollution, epidemiology, biodiversity, forestry engineering, oceanographers, biologists, chemists , environmental engineers, environmental medicine, environmental psychology, among others. Currently, there are multiple environmental agencies, but a lack of command and control over environmental policy is lacking. Another essential aspect is environmental anticipation, with the role of technological innovations such as sensors, artificial intelligence, big data, satellites, and radars in predicting environmental changes, as well as monitoring water flow and green areas, and detecting flood and fire risks. Environmental governance standards, with environmental quality indicators, are needed at the federal, state, and municipal levels. There are problems with a lack of alignment between environmental policies, traffic policies, public transportation policies, urban mobility policies, electrical infrastructure policies, and others. Also, it is important to align environmental policy and energy policy, regarding the use of renewable clean energy sources and the issue of fossil fuels, in the context of the just energy transition.
It is necessary to ensure the coherence and unity of environmental policies. There are structural deficiencies in [1]the organization of environmental protection. An analysis of Supreme Court judgments reveals numerous cases demonstrating the structural deficiencies of the Brazilian State in environmental protection: Direct Action of Unconstitutionality – ADI 6.148/DF against Resolution No. 491/2018 of the National Environmental Council, which adopted air quality standards lower than those defined by the World Health Organization; ADPF No. 623 unanimously ruled that Federal Decree No. 9,806 of May 29, 2019, which altered the composition of the National Environmental Council (CONAMA) [2]to increase government representation and reduce civil society representation, was unconstitutional. The STF decision upheld the principle of prohibiting environmental regression and the right to environmental participation. ADPF No. 708/DF, regarding the federal government’s failure to fully allocate resources from the Climate Fund in 2019, and ADPFs No. 743, 746, and 857 (also unanimously) regarding failures to combat fires, [3]and ADPF No. 109 regarding the use of asbestos [4]. Furthermore, there are numerous international acts for Brazil to follow. UN Resolution No. 76 of 2002 enshrines the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. There’s also the UN Resolution on education for sustainable development. And also the UN Resolution on the right to peace. And then there’s the Paris Agreement on climate change, the Rio Declaration of 1992, the Escazú Treaty [5](on the right to environmental information, the right to environmental participation, the right to environmental transparency), the Aarhaus Treaty, officially called the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters [6](although applicable to European Union countries, it serves as a reference), and the Maastricht Principles. [7](States’ obligations regarding human rights and environmental rights, in relation to the rights of future generations. Furthermore, the environmental agency must be linked to the sustainable development goals of the United Nations 2030 Agenda: decent work (including “green” jobs), health and well-being (environmental health and well-being), zero hunger and sustainable agriculture, quality education, sustainable cities and communities (cities free of air pollution and noise pollution), responsible production and consumption (circular economy and sustainable product responsibility), innovation, industry and infrastructure (technical and responsible innovation, with the eco-design of industrial products, in favor of environmental eco-efficiency, clean, healthy and sustainable industry and clean, healthy and sustainable infrastructure), clean and affordable energy, climate change (set of laws, regulations, actions and responsible practices), gender equality, peace and effective institutions (environmental peace and effective, efficient and efficient environmental institutions), reduction of inequalities (environmental equity and environmental justice, access to water and environmental sanitation, protection of life on land, protection of life below water, partnerships and means of implementation).
Therefore, environmental innovation is essential to create an autonomous environmental agency, including the institution mandate for its leaders, independent of governments and the private sector. The environmental institutional design should maximize environmental protection and environmental assets, and their ecosystem context. It is an environmental institution, which must be multisectoral, with regulatory and oversight powers. [8]Some of the pillars for its structuring: the right to an ecologically balanced environment, the principle of cooperative environmental federalism, the principles of sustainable development, sustainable economy, decarbonization of the economy, environmental eco-efficiency, environmental sustainability, the principles of prohibiting environmental regression, the duty of environmental progressiveness, prevention of environmental damage, precaution of environmental damage, environmental defense, environmental security, and the polluter pays. Regarding the polluter-pays issue, a system for paying environmental compensation and indemnities to polluters should be established, including an environmental fund established with the collection of fines and other revenues to finance environmental protection actions. The financial autonomy of this environmental agency should be guaranteed, ensuring its own budgetary resources. Furthermore, there must be environmental transparency regarding the quantification of environmental damage. The economic value of natural capital must be rigorously measured. Thus, when there is a loss of natural capital or degradation of natural environmental quality, it is possible to quantify environmental costs, environmental damages, and environmental compensation and reparations in a fair and equitable manner.
This federal environmental agency should serve as an inspiration for state and municipal environmental agencies. This environmental agency must, without fail, approve indicators for the quality of environmental protection, the quality of environmental standards, and the quality of environmental oversight. Furthermore, the future environmental agency must foster an innovation ecosystem, using technologies and technological innovations for maximum environmental protection, as well as an ecosystem of environmental services. It must also foster environmental services, that is, services dedicated to environmental protection. Another point is monitoring environmental investments for maximum environmental protection. Another issue is environmental protection against products and services that are harmful to the environment. Another point is environmental diplomacy to include Brazil and its participation with other countries in environmental actions, with the definition of standards, protocols, and norms.
In short, restructuring the Brazilian State’s environmental functions is a fundamental condition for sustainable development and the Brazilian people’s right to an ecologically balanced and healthy environment, ensuring adequate environmental protection and environmental security for all. The human and environmental rights of future and current generations are at risk.
[1]The Supreme Federal Court ruled in ADI 6.148/DF that Resolution No. 491/2018 was on the verge of becoming unconstitutional because it adopted air quality control parameters that were inferior to those defined by the World Health Organization. Therefore, it set a deadline for CONAMA to issue a new Resolution that would comply with WHO standards.
[2]Federal Supreme Court (STF), ADPF 623 available at: https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur483570/false
[3]Federal Supreme Court (STF), ADPF 743, available at: https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur504935/false ,
[4]Federal Supreme Court (STF), ADPF 109, available at: https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur397313/false
[5]See: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_CONF.151_26_Vol.I_Declaration.pdf
[6]See: https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/documents/cep43e.pdf
[7]See: https://www.etoconsortium.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Maastricht-Principles-on-the-Human-Rights-of-Future-Generations_EN.pdf
[8]See, for example, the European Union Environment Agency. The European Union’s Court of Auditors monitors countries’ compliance with environmental targets.
Crédito de imagem: Google
