Anthropogenic biomes

regions in Brazil: only 20 (%) of its original vegetation remains intact; less than 3 (%) of the area is currently protected by law. By 2030, the Cerrado is projected to lose tens of millions of additional acres of native vegetation. This area is also where the three major water resources of Brazil and (of the entire South America) begin: Rio Amazonas, Rio Paraná-Paraguay, Rio São Francisco, (WWF).

Figure 4.1.10: Pivot systems of irrigation in Bahia captured by Copernicus Sentinel 2A on 8 August 2016, ESA

Figure 4.1.11: Anthropogenic biomes involved in soybean production toward Italy in 2018

Table 4.1.4 illustrates which are the percentage of cover of the anthromes defined by Ellis and Ramankutty

Table 4.1.4: Anthrobiomes distributions over Italian soybean import from Brazil in 2018

Anthrobiome Cover

(-) (% )

Remote forests 24.2 Populated forests 17.9 Populated rangelands 13.7 Populated rainfed cropland 13.1 Residential rainfed mosaic 11.2

Wild forests 6.9

Populated irrigated cropland 3.5 Remote rangelands 3.3 Residential rangelands 2.2 Remote croplands 1.1 Rainfed mosaic villages 0.9 Residential irrigated cropland 0.8 Pastoral villages 0.6 Dense settlements 0.3

Urban 0.1

Irrigated villages 0.01 Rainfed villages 0.1

Sparse trees 0.1

In addition, figure 4.1.12 shows the sharing of the all anthromes over the Brazilian states involved in the Italian supply in 2018. It stands out that Mato Grosso has the highest portion of remote forests, followed by Pará and Rondônia which are the countries that have the higher portion of

wild forests. Moreover, the Populated Rangelands are present mainly in Mato Grosso do Sul and Goiás, while the Residantial Rainfed Mosaic permeates the countries located in Mata Atlantica and in Piauí, along the transition toward the Caatinga. Goias and Mato Grosso do Sul present the highest extension of Rangelands, both Remote and Populated. Rio Grande do Sul figures as the only state to have Populated Irrigated Croplands.

Figure 4.1.12: Anthromes distribution over Brazilian states involved in soybean production toward Italy in 2018 overlapped to the Brazilian natural biomes

Table 4.1.5: Prelevant biomes for each state involved in soybean production toward Italy in 2018

State Anthrobiome Cover

Alagoas Residential rainfed mosaic 66%

Amazonas Remote forests 51%

Bahia Residential rainfed mosaic 37%

Goiás Populated rangelands 45%

Mato Grosso Remote forests 45%

Mato Grosso do Sul Populated rangelands 49%

Minas Gerais Residential rainfed mosaic 31%

Pará Remote forests 36%

Paraná Residential rainfed mosaic 42%

Piauí Populated forests 51%

Rio de Janeiro Residential rainfed mosaic 46%

Rio Grande do Norte Residential rainfed mosaic 56%

Rio Grande do Sul Residential rainfed mosaic 26%

Rondônia Remote forests 37%

Santa Catarina Residential rainfed mosaic 44%

São Paulo Residential rainfed mosaic 35%

Both from table 4.1.5 and from figure 4.1.4, it is possible to point out that, as it stands from the mapping of Ellis and Ramankutty, the states along the Atlantic Forest of Mata Atlantica are the most anthropized, especially in a mixed composition of residential land use and rainfed croplands, still leaving some space to the Populated Forest. Further, looking at the weighted allocation over states, the average trend highlights that states are characterized by a prelevant anthrome that weights on average the 45% of the total coverage. The only state to differ from this behavior, presenting a higher diversity, is Rio Grande do Sul, where the prelevant antrhome - the Residential Rainfed Mosaic - accounts for the 26%, followed by the Populated Rainfed Cropland (19%), the Populated Rangelands (16%) and the Populated Irrigated Cropland (14%).

The analysis of the anthromes at at the municipality scale has allowed to point out further detailed observations, as shown in figure 4.1.13.

Figure 4.1.13: Prevalent anthromes over Brazilian municipalities involved in soybean production toward Italy in 2018 overlaid to the Brazilian natural biomes

The municipalities in the states of Rondônia, Mato Grosso, Goiás, Minas Gerais, Sao Paulo, Paraná, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul reflect the anthrome characterization of their states.

Differently, the municipalities in Pará, Mato Grosso do Sul, Alagoas, Bahia, being few- or even the only- municipalities of their state involved in the export to Italy, present a specific characterization which may differ from that of their state. From figure 4.1.13 it emerges that, in the state of Bahia, the municipality of Correntina is defined as Populated Forest, the municipalities in the north-western Pará, Santarém and Mojuí dos Campos, belong all to the class of Remote Forest.

What surprise the most in figure 4.1.4 is that the most common anthromes identified for the municipalities of Bahia, Mato Grosso, Rondônia, Piauí and Pará are clearly in contrast with the results obtained for the production at the municipality scale and with the findings illustrated in the subsection 4.1.1, because of both the land use change emerged at the municipality scale and the intensity of production, pointed out by the results in table 4.1.1 and by the graph in figure 4.3.3.

From the results shown in this first section it is possible to infer, in a first step, the characteristics of the Italian supply from Brazil, looking at the results obtained for the municipalities, states, biomes involved and the relatives anthropogenic interactions. It is clear that Mato Grosso and

Rio Grande do Sul are definitely the biggest supplier of Italy. Moreover, the comparison between the results obtained for the Italian import and the ones obtained for the other main European importers, points out Rio Grande do Sul to be a favorite supplier of Italy. Interestingly, important centres of production are also localized in Rondônia, Pará, Goiás and Bahia states, which are located mainly in Amazonia and Cerrado, where the anthromes in 2008 were classified as mainly Remote Forests. This contrast, highlighted from the comparison of the production patters of 2018 and the anthopogenic interactions with biomes, referred to the year 2000 of Ellis and Ramankutty, suggests that in the last 20 years, the soybean cropland conversion played, and is continuing to play, a predominant role in biomes and anthromes alteration and that Italian import supply, investigated at the municipality scale, is not exempted from this scenario. This injection is quite well-known when referring to forest and biodiversity conservation, but what is less stressed is the relation with water resources management and conservation. What it is interesting to underline is the water issue related to the soybean supply and the rising of a scenario where Brazil will be more irrigated, due to both an increasing of the irrigated lands already underway, e.g Correntina in western Bahia and Rio Grande do Sul, and to an intense land use change, e.g central municipalities of Mato Grosso, which may lead to a higher need of irrigation in the crop development stages because of the hydrological alterations consequent to deforestation in a long term prevision.