🔗 Share this article

Razor-straight lines of genetically identical trees surround the Baixa Verde settlement in north-eastern Brazil. These uniform trees stand in stark contrast to the patches of native Atlantic woodland, one of the most biologically diverse ecosystems on Earth.

Encircled by close to 247,000 acres of eucalyptus plantations, Baixa Verde exemplifies a rare local victory over a multinational in Brazil. The rural settlement exists today due to nearly two decades of court disputes over property claims – but the fight is not over yet.

After fighting to retain their land, the households now confront an unparalleled safety emergency marked by armed clashes, arson and death threats, within a surge of aggression stemming from a land dispute that has escalated since 2024.

Disputes over property ownership have historically been an problem in the region. Obtaining property titles is commonly deemed to validate illegal land seizures from traditional communities, and local people had believed that a wood-pulp manufacturer was cultivating eucalyptus on public land.

In 2008, one of the founders of the Baixa Verde settlement and a local activist visited government archives to inspect official papers. They discovered the document that proved the 1,300 hectares in contention were publicly owned. “We were certain that it was state property,” states the founder.

With the document in hand, they organized 91 local families and aligned with the Landless Workers Movement, a political and social organisation advocating for agrarian reform. Its first action was to take over a section of a eucalyptus plantation operated by the company, alleging the firm of utilizing government property.

Two years after the original occupation, the organization won state recognition that the corporation did not have legal title to the parcel of land planted by the firm. “This ruling was a victory not just for the community property campaign but for all the social movements of the country,” says a community member who was raised in the settlement and is now one of the leaders of the movement.

After years of roadblocks and legal battles, the Bahia state government reached a settlement with the corporation and the movement in 2016, restoring 1,300 hectares of corporate property to the public domain and providing each family a parcel large enough to cultivate their crops. Of the sixty-one households staying, 53 have moved into their assigned lands.

“Winning a right to the property means that we now have a space to care for our children,” says the community leader.

---

Despite losing the land, a corporate spokesperson maintains that the company has always functioned with “openness, social and environmental responsibility” and respect for the area residents. “The company has never been convicted of land grabbing and restates that its operational zones are legally regulated and operate with the required environmental permits.”

However, in the time following the agreement, the households say they have experienced life-threatening warnings, gunfire, burned homes, stolen produce and destroyed fields.

Per information from the movement, the dispute now focuses on property parcels that remain occupied by farmers affiliated with the regional labor organization. When it was facing loss of possession of the contested land, the company donated 300 nearby hectares to the union – a donation confirmed by the organization’s directors.

“There is a lot of persecution happening around here. Our shelters have been set on fire, as well as our sugarcane fields.”

Over the past four years, six organizers of the movement have been placed under protective watch by Brazil’s protection programme for rights activists, communicators and ecology advocates. The authorities has suggested that some of these leaders relocate, but due to dedication to the movement and connection with their hard-won land, they have declined.

Because of the life-threatening messages he has received, a community pioneer says he has trouble sleeping at night. “I feel genuinely fearful that an incident may occur to my household,” he says.

The organization states that eight families do not feel safe enough to farm their lands, which remain occupied by farmers reportedly connected to the company.

The corporation says that during the previous fifteen years, it has designated “more than 20,000 hectares to agrarian reform initiatives, whether through court settlements, contributions to the federal land reform agency, donations, or direct sales, to settle persistent disputes in the territory.”

The company also says “the establishment of the communities – from design to subdivision and plot allocation – was conducted entirely by the regional authorities, without involvement from the corporation”, and “does not comment on conflicts between social movements”.

One resident is among the two individuals who still live in the old encampment. She says she has been intimidated by weapon-carrying individuals who surrounded her house and shot at the ground. Since no one lives nearby, the woman – who resides by herself – believes the gunshots were meant to intimidate her out of taking possession of her allocated land.

In August, the state of Bahia authorised the removal of union farmers who remain on Baixa Verde lots – but the ruling has not been implemented.

---

Environmental Challenges and the ‘Green Desert’

Besides defending against threats and violence, transforming properties previously utilized for single-crop eucalyptus farming into agricultural cultivation is now the primary difficulty for the settlement residents. Tree cultivation is dominated by major international corporations that, from the 1960s onward, have been transforming agricultural and woodland areas into single-crop farms, motivated by international market needs.

Brazil is the world’s largest producer of the tree species, a fast-growing, thirsty crop, whose pulp is exported to make cardboard and paper products. The majority of the nation’s tree fiber is exported to Europe, where it is utilized for creating stationery items often promoted as a renewable alternative to synthetic materials – despite the environmental damage resulting from single-crop farming.

Within Bahia state, the proliferation of these plantations has received the regional nickname “green desert”, due to the disappearance of native species and the critical lack of resources and territory faced by families living near eucalyptus plantations.

One community leader grew up in the region and recalls the waterway before the region was changed by single-crop tree farming. “We previously traversed it in a boat. It was abundant,” he says. “After the company arrived, it disappeared.” He links the resource shortage to the company’s arrival in 1991.

The company says it “adopts a mosaic management system, in which trees are grown in plateau areas, while lowlands, water sources and indigenous plants are preserved. This system guarantees ground conservation, animal habitat preservation and the maintenance of water resources.” The company also says it “conducts continuous monitoring of small watersheds in its operational zone” and “creates tree-planting and woodland renewal initiatives in areas near communities”.

Within the adjacent region of Minas Gerais, the tree cultivation area of Turmalina municipality has seen its aquifer depth decrease by 4.5 metres over the previous four decades, according to researchers at Minas Gerais Federal University.

Plant life in single-crop tree farms takes in just over a quarter of precipitation to replenish aquifer reserves – versus a 50% level of absorption linked to native forest. Seventy-five percent of agricultural households interviewed in the state reported their harvests suffering by the scarcity.

The growing of the tree species also presents a heightened danger of wildfire. Farms are highly combustible that Chile rejected the species as a practical environmental answer after a series of large wildfires in its national farms.

Notwithstanding ecological dangers, commercial tree farms continue to play a significant role in the emissions trading system, with plants being marketed as carbon credits to fossil fuel polluters to offset their emissions. Despite opposition from campaigners, in {