Brazil’s scientists battle to escape 20-year funding freeze

Ângelo, Cláudio Felisoni de

doi:10.1038/nature.2016.21014

Cited by 31 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, we mention the controversial PEC‐55 (previously PEC 241), an austerity plan that will freeze the national budget for the next 20 years. It means that investments on scientific research and environmental conservation will decline (Angelo, ). Environmental agencies will experience limited expenditure, with negative effects on the recruitment of new officials, inspections and the enforcement of regulations (Magalhães et al., ).…”

Section: A Number Of Threatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neotropical freshwater fishes imperilled by unsustainable policies

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neotropical freshwater fishes are the most diverse on the planet (>5,500 species), although nations in Latin America have been negligent regarding their conservation. National policies have historically encouraged unsustainable practices, and recent decades have witnessed a sharp increase in harmful activities. Our aim with this review was to expose this situation and illustrate how national policies constitute the main threat to freshwater fish biodiversity. We explain that the most devastating, pervasive and systemic threats are rooted in official policies, particularly unsustainable activities (e.g. hydropower, water diversion, mining, aquaculture, agriculture and fishing), poor management/conservation (e.g. fish stocking and passages) and harmful legislation (e.g. poor licensing, non‐native species). We provide a broad portrait of the Neotropical scenario, where unsustainable policies have caused considerable damage to freshwater ecosystems, and focus on major examples from Brazil, where development projects have caused large‐scale losses to fish biodiversity. Such modus operandi of human development is incompatible with the persistence of biodiversity, and no simple solution is available to correct or minimize its effects. The current situation demands a profound behavioural shift towards better practices and policies, or these multiple high‐impact activities will continue eroding freshwater fish biodiversity and impairing essential ecosystem services.

show abstract

Section: A Number Of Threatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neotropical freshwater fishes imperilled by unsustainable policies

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The importance of Proteaceae species richness in providing nectar resources Main supervisor: Anton Pauw, Stellenbosch University, South Africa Co-supervisor: Phoebe Barnard, South African National Biodiversity Institute, South Africa Collaborator: Anthony G. Rebelo, South African National Biodiversity Institute, South Africa Me next to a protea in the Cederberg A community of bird-pollinated proteas at Kogelberg Recent articles in Nature and Science (Rodríguez Mega 2016, Román 2016, Angelo 2016 reported the concerns of Brazil and Argentina's scientists on cuts in the national funding for research and development. The neoliberal administrations that are now ruling both countries changed a long-lasting policy of supporting Science.…”

Section: Young Scientist Oral Presentation Award First Prizementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The neoliberal administrations that are now ruling both countries changed a long-lasting policy of supporting Science. The new Brazilian government, which took power after a controversial process in the congress, is pushing a constitutional amendment to freeze the federal budget for the next 20 years (Angelo 2016). If approved, this restriction may greatly reduce expenditures on science and development relative to the GDP, which in 2012 has reached 1.15%, the highest level among the countries in South America.…”

Section: Young Scientist Oral Presentation Award First Prizementioning

confidence: 99%

Plant species loss and communication

Diekmann¹

2016

Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

December is a time of reflection on the challenges of the past year as well as on our hopes for the coming one. The experiences from the June Symposium in Brazil are still vibrating in our minds, and this issue is again devoted mainly to them. With pleasure, we are awaiting the forthcoming meeting in Palermo next year, and the welcome call is also included in this issue.The year 2016 is almost over and we are happy that it has been active and fruitful thanks to many of you who contributed to the events and activities organized by the IAVS and its working groups. We would also like to thank those of you who helped to make our Bulletin interesting by providing news, information and/or pictures. We wish all of you a peaceful holiday time and good luck for the coming year 2017. One of my favorite courses at the University is a series of lectures on conservation biology and its applications in practical nature conservation. A considerable time of this course is devoted to conveying the manifold values of biodiversity and to providing evidence for the disastrous loss of biodiversity around the globe, across different habitat types and organism groups. When I stress that northern Germanywhere my university is located -is no exception here and suffers from an unprecedented decline in plant species richness, many students remain skeptical: Hasn't nature conservation counteracted a further loss of species by creating lots of new reserves and by making large restoration efforts? Aren't there positive population trends of many large bird species (crane, geese, sea eagle) and mammals (wolves have established themselves again in Germany) in the country that contradict the statement of a declining biodiversity? Isn't climate change still of minor importance in temperate ecosystems compared to many other parts of the world? If there is a biodiversity crisis, why isn't it perceived as a crisis even by educated biology students? I believe that there are several reasons for this, and that we as vegetation scientists can and should contribute to change this perception in order to engage people in biodiversity issues and to prompt them to take action.One basic problem of the weak public perception of the biodiversity crisis is that humans are confronted with a large number of problems other than environmental, including political and social issues that often rank higher than biodiversity (Novacek 2008). In addition, over the last years, public attention has markedly shifted away from habitat and biodiversity loss to climate change and global warming. People simply question that biodiversity affects their health and well-being, ignoring or not realizing that plants and animals provide enormous benefits, for example in the form of food and pharmaceutical products. To reverse this trend and to raise the public awareness of the biodiversity crisis, we need to become better in communicating the findings of our ecological research to a wider audience, and in showing the critical role of plant species in providing different ecosystem servi...

show abstract

“…It is necessary, now more than ever, to strengthen joint actions within society and focus on the great majority of the Brazilian population, which depends on public services in the sectors of education, health, and social assistance. Furthermore, the situation described above raises concerns about the development of science, technology, and innovation in Brazil (4) (5) . Beyond these challenges, the next five years will bring opportunities for more concrete, shared actions in the fight against Chagas disease.…”

Section: Towards Control Of Chagas Disease: the Contribution Of The Nmentioning

confidence: 99%