Parks under attack: Brazil’s Iguaçu National Park illustrates a global threat to biodiversity


National parks are under attack in many parts of the world, including Brazil, which the Convention on Biodiversity ranks as the world’s most biodiverse country. Brazil has been experiencing an unprecedented environmental crisis, and the political situation in the country favors approval of environmentally damaging measures by both the legislative and executive branches of government. A new and largely unreported setback is a proposal in the National Congress for a road cutting the Iguaçu National Park in two. Here, we identify environmental threats from the proposed road and pressures on the park from the surrounding human population. The proposed laws violate Brazil’s constitution and would cause immeasurable damage to the park’s biodiversity and associated ecosystem services. The road would reduce the cost of transport between two municipalities (counties), but not the cost of transporting soybeans, their main agricultural product. However, the local population would be better served by strengthening its ties to the park and promoting economic alternatives such as tourism, agroforestry, and organic agriculture. The Caminho do Colono road illustrates the danger posed by downgrading the status of protected areas in order to allow environmentally damaging activities. This trend is occurring in many countries and is especially evident in Brazil.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1


  1. Andrews, A. 1990. Fragmentation of habitat by roads and utility corridors: a review. Australian Journal of Zoology 26: 130–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bellard, C., C. Leclerc, B. Leroy, M. Bakkenes, S. Veloz, W. Thuiller, and F. Courchamp. 2014. Vulnerability of biodiversity hotspots to global change. Global Ecology and Biogeography 23: 1376–1386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bernard, E., L.A.O. Penna, and E. Araújo. 2014. Downgrading, downsizing, degazettement, and reclassification of protected areas in Brazil. Conservation Biology 28: 939–950.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Borges, A. 2019. Confira a lista das 67 unidades de conservação que o governo federal quer reduzir. O Estado de São Paulo, 12 June 2019. Available at:,confira-a-listadas-unidades-de-conservacao-que-o-governo-querreduzir,70002868340.

  5. Bourscheit, A. 2020. Estrada no Iguaçu pode beneficiar negócios de parlamentar que propõe a obra. OEco, 1 March 2020.

  6. Brazil, PR (Presidência da República). 2000. Lei no. 9.985 de 18 de julho de 2000.

  7. Brazil, PR (Presidência da República). 2020. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988.

  8. Brocardo, C.R., M.X. da Silva, P. Ferracioli, J.F. Cândido Jr., G.V. Bianconi, M.F.D. Moraes, M. Galetti, M. Passamani, et al. 2019. Mamíferos do Parque Nacional do Iguaçu. Oecologia Australis 23: 165–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Carr, E. 1998. Wilderness by design: Landscape architecture and the National Park Service. U of Nebraska Press.

  10. Carver, E. 2013. Birding in the United States: A demographic and economic analysis. Annual Economic Report 2011: 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Delgado, J.D., N.L. Arroyo, J.R. Arévalo, and J.M. Fernández-Palacios. 2007. Edge effects of roads on temperature, light, canopy cover, and canopy height in laurel and pine forests (Tenerife, Canary Islands). Landscape and Urban Planning 81: 328–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. de Marques, A.A.B., and C.A. Peres. 2015. Pervasive legal threats to protected areas in Brazil. Oryx 49: 25–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Escobar, H. 2019. Brazilian president attacks deforestation data. Science 365: 419–419.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fearnside, P.M. 2015. Amazon dams and waterways: Brazil’s Tapajós Basin plans. Ambio 44: 426–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fearnside, P.M. 2017a. Belo Monte: Actors and arguments in the struggle over Brazil’s most controversial Amazonian dam. Die Erde 148: 14–26.

  16. Fearnside, P.M. 2017b. Brazil’s Belo Monte Dam: Lessons of an Amazonian resource struggle. Die Erde 148: 167–184.

  17. Fearnside, P.M. 2017c. Amazon dam defeats Brazil’s environment agency. Mongabay 20 September 2017.

  18. Fearnside, P.M. 2019. Setbacks under President Bolsonaro: A challenge to sustainability in the Amazon. Sustentabilidade International Science Journal 1: 38–52.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fearnside, P.M., and Cruz, P.V. 2018. Chainsaw massacre: Protected areas in danger in Brazil’s state of Rondônia (commentary) Mongabay 30 October 2018.

  20. Fearnside, P.M., and G.L. Ferreira. 1984. Roads in Rondonia: Highway construction and the farce of unprotected reserves in Brazil’s Amazonian forest. Environmental Conservation 11: 358–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fearnside, P.M., and P.M.L.A. Graça. 2006. BR-319: Brazil’s Manaus-Porto Velho Highway and the potential impact of linking the arc of deforestation to central Amazonia. Environmental Management 38: 705–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ferrante, L., and P.M. Fearnside. 2019. Brazil’s new president and ‘ruralists’ threaten Amazonia’s environment, traditional peoples and the global climate. Environmental Conservation 46: 261–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ferreguetti, Á.C., J. Pereira-Ribeiro, J.A. Prevedello, W.M. Tomás, C.F.D. Rocha, and H.G. Bergallo. 2018. One step ahead to predict potential poaching hotspots: Modeling occupancy and detectability of poachers in a neotropical rainforest. Biological Conservation 227: 133–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Holderegger, R., and M. Di Giulio. 2010. The genetic effects of roads: A review of empirical evidence. Basic and Applied Ecology 11: 522–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kropf, M., and A. Eleuterio. 2015. Estrada do Colono: Análise dos argumentos que subsidiam o conflito. In Anais Do VII Seminário Brasileiro Sobre Áreas Protegidas e Inclusão Social (SAPIS) e II Encontro Latino Americano Sobre Áreas Protegidas e Inclusão Social (ELAPIS), ed. N. Hanazaki, D.F. Herbst, J.V. da C. Ávila, M.R. Heineberg, T.C.C. Gomes, 447–454. Florianópolis, Brazil: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.

  26. Laurance, W.F., J.L.C. Camargo, P.M. Fearnside, T.E. Lovejoy, G.B. Williamson, R.C.G. Mesquita, C.F.J. Meyer, P.E.D. Bobrowiec, et al. 2018. An Amazonian rainforest and its fragments as a laboratory of global change. Biological Reviews 93: 223–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Laurance, W.F., M. Goosem, and S.G.W. Laurance. 2009. Impacts of roads and linear clearings on tropical forests. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24: 659–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Marvier, M., P. Kareiva, and M.G. Neubert. 2004. Habitat destruction, fragmentation, and disturbance promote invasion by habitat generalists in a multispecies metapopulation. Risk Analysis 24: 869–878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A.B. Fonseca, J. Kent, and G.A.B. Da-Fonseca. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ortiz, R.A. 2009. Conservation versus development at the Iguaçu National Park, Brazil. Ambientalia 1: 141–160.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Pádua, M.T.J. 2011. Do Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação. In Dez anos do Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da natureza lições do passado, realizações presentes e perspectivas para o futuro, ed. R. Medeiros, and F.S. Araújo, 21–36. Brasília, DF, Brazil: Ministério do Meio Ambiente.

  32. Revollo-Fernández, D.A. 2015. Does money fly? The economic value of migratory birdwatching in Xochimilco, Mexico. Economic Modelling 6: 643–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rodrigues, I. 2020. PL quer tirar proteção integral da Serra do Divisor e reduzir quase 8 mil hectares de Resex no Acre. G1, 27 January 2020.

  34. Rosenn, K.S. 1971. The jeito: Brazil’s institutional bypass of the formal legal system and its development implications. American Journal of Comparative Law 19: 514–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tollefson, J. 2019. ‘Tropical Trump’ sparks unprecedented crisis for Brazilian science. Nature 572: 161–162.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Truscott, A.M., S.C.F. Palmer, G.M. McGowan, J.N. Cape, and S. Smart. 2005. Vegetation composition of roadside verges in Scotland: The effects of nitrogen deposition, disturbance and management. Environmental Pollution 136: 109–118.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. WWF (Worldwide Fund for Nature). 2015. Produto 4 – Propostas de atividades econômicas baseadas em BES para o entorno do Parque Nacional do Iguaçu, Volume 1 – Análise de Trade-Offs. WWF, Brasília, DF and Tamoios Inteligência Geográfica, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. 41 pp.

Download references


We thank all scientists who contributed and support our manuscript; some of them we cannot name due to political and social retaliations. The first author was supported by CAPES, Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (Brazil).

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Victor Mateus Prasniewski.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prasniewski, V.M., Szinwelski, N., Sobral-Souza, T. et al. Parks under attack: Brazil’s Iguaçu National Park illustrates a global threat to biodiversity. Ambio 49, 2061–2067 (2020).

Download citation


  • Atlantic forest
  • Biodiversity threats
  • Environmental throwbacks
  • Law
  • Policy