Fighting deforestation not only protects the forest—it also saves lives. That is the conclusion of a new study by the Amazônia 2030 project, “Combating deforestation reduces crime in the Amazon.” The research shows that strengthening environmental enforcement—especially through the DETER satellite monitoring system, implemented in 2006—reduced homicides in the region by about 15%, equivalent to 1,477 lives saved each year. The findings indicate that effective environmental policies also function as public security policies, with a direct impact on land conflicts, the expansion of illegal markets, and the operations of organized crime along deforestation frontiers.

While Brazil has reduced its homicide rates over the past decade, the Amazon followed the opposite path. Between 2006 and 2016, violence surged in Amazonian municipalities: the homicide rate rose from 33.1 to 52.1 per 100,000 inhabitants—an increase of 57.3%, far higher than in the rest of the country. The study explains that this violence has distinct characteristics: it occurs mainly in rural areas, near deforestation fronts, illegal mining, land grabbing, and logging—territories where the state has historically had a limited presence.

Conducted by researchers Rafael Araujo, Vítor Possebom, and Gabriela Sett, the study identified a direct link between environmental enforcement and reductions in violence. With real-time monitoring and swift application of environmental fines, state presence increases, raising the costs of illegal activities and shrinking the operating space for criminal networks. The study shows that each fine issued reduces homicides by 0.73 per 100,000 inhabitants in the following year, and that municipalities subject to stronger enforcement are less likely to record lethal violence.

In addition, the research estimates that the social benefits of avoided violence amount to US$2.3 billion per year, while the operational costs of the agencies responsible for DETER are around US$622 million. The social return is 3.7 times the investment, not including environmental gains such as reduced carbon emissions and biodiversity protection.

According to the authors, the results make clear that effective environmental policies should also be treated as public security policies. They recommend integrating conservation actions with crime-fighting efforts, especially in critical territories where deforestation, illegal markets, and violence advance together. This includes strengthening coordinated operations among environmental agencies, police forces, and local governance structures, prioritizing regions with higher levels of conflict and pressure from illegal activities.

The study also highlights the need to reinforce the operational capacity of Ibama, ICMBio, and state agencies by expanding staff, technology, and territorial presence. Investing in environmental enforcement, the authors argue, is investing in institutional stability, homicide reduction, and sustainable development. Monitoring, command, and control policies have the potential to interrupt cycles of rural violence and consolidate state presence in historically vulnerable areas.

The analysis confirms a central message: protecting the forest also means protecting lives. In a region marked by institutional fragility and illegal networks, monitoring and state action have a proven capacity to reduce homicides, curb illicit markets, and promote sustainable development.