Poor compliance and exemptions facilitate ongoing deforestation

Abstract

Many nations are struggling to reduce deforestation, despite having extensive environmental protection laws in place and commitments to international agreements that address the biodiversity and climate crises. We developed a novel framework to quantify the extent to which contemporary deforestation is being captured under national and subnational laws. We then applied this framework to northern Australia as a case study, a development and deforestation hotspot with ecosystems of global significance. First, deforestation may be compliant under all relevant legislation, either through assessment and approval or because of exemptions in the legislation. Second, deforestation may be compliant under at least one relevant law, but not all. Third, there may be no evidence of deforestation assessment or exemption from assessment, despite their apparent requirement, which could mean the deforestation is potentially noncompliant. Finally, deforestation may occur in an area or under circumstances that are beyond the intended scope of any relevant legislation. All deforestation that we analyzed was hypothetically covered by one or more laws. However, 65% of deforestation was potentially noncompliant with at least one law. Because multiple laws could be relevant to a given clearing event, the majority of clearing was still compliant with at least one law, but of these events, only a small proportion was explicitly approved (19%). The remaining were permitted under various exemptions. Of all the legislation we analyzed, most of the exempt clearing occurred under one subnational law and most potentially noncompliant clearing occurred under one national law. Our results showed that even a nation with a suite of mature environmental protection laws is falling well short of achieving international commitments regarding deforestation. Our framework can be used to pinpoint the pathways of policy change required for nations to align local laws with these international accords.

Keywords: Australia; agricultura; agriculture; bosques; environmental policy; especies amenazadas; forests; política ambiental; threatened species; woodlands; zonas boscosas.

FIGURE 1

Level of compliance of vegetation clearing events under all relevant legislation (top row) (fully compliant, compliant by assessment, notification, or exemption; partially compliant, compliant under at least some relevant legislation but not all; potentially noncompliant, clearing appeared to require assessment or notification but no evidence of either under any relevant legislation; no legislation relevant to the clearing) and under relevant individual acts (bottom row) (compliant clearing split between whether it had been assessed and whether it fell under an explicit exemption for each legislative framework separately).

FIGURE 2

Areas of forest and woodland across northern Australia considered in the analyses of policy‐related reasons leading to clearing in (a) the Northern Territory (NT) and parts of Western Australia (WA) and (b) in Queensland (QLD) (white, areas cleared in 2015; gray, land‐use types classified as “nature conservation” and “other protected areas” [Land Use of Australia 2010–2011 to 2015–2016 250 m²]; pale green, areas burned during the year for which clearing was mapped [combined MODIS burned area 500 m²]; brown, vegetation types that were not forest or woodland prior to European colonization [pre‐1750 Major Vegetation Subgroups NVIS 6.0]). In the NT and WA, areas unlikely to be cleared are excluded from analyses to reduce false‐positive errors and increase accuracy of detecting anthropogenic habitat loss with the National Forest and Sparse Woody Vegetation data. In QLD, only clearing events that occurred in plantation leases (gray) were removed because SLATS data sets underwent extensive manual editing and quality assurance. The Queensland woody vegetation extent data set (Queensland Government) illustrates areas of woody vegetation (including remnant and regrowth forests and woodland) (green) and cleared areas (white).

FIGURE 3

Pathways leading to vegetation clearing (≥20 ha) compliance outcomes when considering all relevant legislation (first row, subset of clearing analyzed in Queensland [1,588,342 ha from 2014–2015 to 2019–2020]); second row, subset of clearing analyzed in the Northern Territory [9481 ha from 2015 to 2021]; final row, subset of clearing analyzed in Western Australia (24 ha from 2015 to 2021).

FIGURE 4

Vegetation clearing (≥ 20 ha) compliance when considering all relevant legislation: (a) clearing in Queensland categorized under all pathways except partially compliant, (b) clearing in Queensland categorized as partially compliant (total clearing in Queensland 1,588,342 ha), (c) clearing in Western Australia (24 ha), and (d) clearing in the Northern Territory (9481 ha) (unknown compliance, unable to be classified and applies only in Queensland; inset maps, location in northern Australia; clearing events not to scale in Queensland and the Northern Territory to ensure visibility).

FIGURE 5

Proportion of total clearing (≥20 ha) when considering relevant legislation individually in (a) Queensland (1,588,342 ha cleared), (b) Northern Territory (9481 ha cleared), and (c) Western Australia (24 ha cleared) (EPBC, Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; VMA, Vegetation Management Act 1999; PA [Queensland], Planning Act 2016; EPA [Queensland], Environment Protection Act 1994; NCA, Nature Conservation Act 1992; FA, Forestry Act 1959; PLA, Pastoral Land Act 1992; PA [Northern Territory], Planning Act 1999; EPA [Western Australia], Environment Protection Act 1986).

FIGURE 6

Clearing events (≥20 ha) classified as (a) potentially noncompliant with the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (i.e., involved ≥20 ha of threatened or migratory species [potential] habitat loss or loss of a mapped endangered or critically endangered threatened ecological community) in Queensland from 2014 to 2020 (excluding regrowth cleared within the past 15 years) and (b) unregulated regrowth, an exemption in the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VMA) and Planning Act 2016 in Queensland from 2014 to 2020. There is some overlap between the 2 maps, which suggests a disconnect between state and Commonwealth laws. Unregulated regrowth exempt under the VMA may have supported threatened species and required referral to the EPBC Act.