🔗 Share this article

Razor-straight lines of eucalyptus clones border the Baixa Verde settlement in north-eastern Brazil. The uniform trees present a sharp difference to the remnants of wild Atlantic forest, one of the most biologically diverse ecosystems globally.

Surrounded by nearly 100,000 hectares of commercial eucalyptus groves, Baixa Verde represents a rare local victory over a multinational in Brazil. The rural settlement owes its existence due to nearly two decades of legal battles over property claims – yet the conflict continues.

Following struggles to keep their territory, the households now face an unparalleled safety emergency marked by armed clashes, fire attacks and threats on their lives, within a surge of aggression stemming from a land dispute that has intensified since 2024.

Conflicts over property ownership have long been an issue in the region. Securing land deeds is commonly deemed to legitimise land grabs from indigenous populations, and local people had believed that a pulp-production company was planting eucalyptus trees on public land.

During 2008, one of the founders of the Baixa Verde settlement and another community member examined public records to inspect official papers. They found the page that proved the 3,200 acres in dispute were publicly owned. “We were certain that it was public land,” states the founder.

With the document in hand, they assembled ninety-one area households and aligned with the Movement of Landless Workers, a social and political group 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 using public land.

Two years after the initial takeover, the organization won state recognition that the corporation did not legally own the parcel of land planted by the company. “This ruling was a victory not just for the community property campaign but for all the civil society groups of Brazil,” says a settlement resident who grew up in the encampment and is now one of the leaders of the movement.

Following many years of obstacles and court fights, the Bahia state government reached a settlement with the company and the organization in 2016, restoring 3,200 acres of corporate property to the public domain and providing each family a plot sufficiently sized to cultivate their crops. Of the sixty-one households staying, fifty-three have relocated into their new plots.

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

---

Although forfeiting the property, a company representative maintains that the company has always operated with “transparency, social and environmental responsibility” and consideration for the local population. “The corporation has never been found guilty of land grabbing and restates that its operational zones are legally regulated and operate with the necessary ecological licenses.”

Yet, in the time following the agreement, the families say they have encountered death threats, shooting incidents, burned homes, stolen produce and ruined farmland.

Per information from the movement, the conflict now centres on property parcels that remain inhabited by farmers associated with the regional labor organization. When it was facing loss of possession of the contested land, the corporation gave 300 nearby hectares to the labor group – a contribution confirmed by the union’s leadership.

“There is a lot of persecution happening around here. Our shelters have been burned down, as well as our cane plantations.”

During the last four years, six leaders of the organization have been placed under protective watch by Brazil’s protection programme for human rights defenders, journalists and ecology advocates. The authorities has suggested that some of these leaders relocate, but due to dedication to the movement and bond to their fought-for property, they have declined.

Due to the death threats he has obtained, one founder says he has difficulty resting at night. “I feel genuinely fearful that something is going to happen to my family,” he says.

The organization states that eight households do not feel safe enough to cultivate their plots, which remain occupied by farmers allegedly associated with 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 judicial agreements, donations to the federal land reform agency, donations, or straight purchases, to resolve ongoing conflicts in the territory.”

The firm also says “the establishment of the communities – from design to subdivision and lot definition – was conducted entirely by the state government, without interference from the corporation”, and “does not comment on disputes among activist groups”.

A community member is among the two individuals who still reside in the original settlement. She says she has been harassed by weapon-carrying individuals who surrounded her house and fired weapons nearby. Because no one lives nearby, the resident – who lives alone – thinks the gunshots were intended to threaten her out of taking possession of her allocated land.

In August, the Bahia state government approved the eviction of labor group-associated agricultural workers who remain on settlement properties – but the ruling has not been implemented.

---

Environmental Challenges and the ‘Emerald Wasteland’

Besides defending against threats and violence, converting lands once used for single-crop eucalyptus farming into food production is now the primary difficulty for the settlement residents. Tree cultivation is controlled by large multinationals that, since the 1960s, have been transforming agricultural and woodland areas into single-crop farms, driven by global demand.

The country is the global leading grower of eucalyptus, a fast-growing, thirsty crop, whose fiber is exported to make cardboard and writing materials. Most of the country’s tree fiber is shipped to European nations, where it is used to make paper products often marketed as a renewable alternative to synthetic materials – notwithstanding ecological harm resulting from single-crop farming.

In Bahia, the expansion of these farms has received the regional nickname “emerald wasteland”, due to the disappearance of native species and the severe shortage of water and land faced by families living near commercial tree farms.

A settlement founder grew up in the region and remembers the river before the area was transformed by eucalyptus monoculture. “We used to cross it in a canoe. It was abundant,” he says. “Following corporate establishment, it dried up.” He attributes the water scarcity to the company’s arrival in 1991.

The corporation says it “implements a varied management approach, in which trees are grown in plateau areas, while lowlands, water sources and indigenous plants are preserved. This model ensures soil protection, animal habitat preservation and the maintenance of water resources.” The company also says it “performs ongoing observation of small watersheds in its area of operation” and “develops reforestation and forest restoration projects in locations adjacent to settlements”.

In the neighbouring state of Minas Gerais, the eucalyptus region of Turmalina has seen its groundwater level drop by 4.5 metres over the past 45 years, per scientific studies at Minas Gerais Federal University.

Vegetation under eucalyptus monoculture absorbs 26% of rainfall to replenish aquifer reserves – compared with a half of rainfall intake associated with indigenous woodland. Seventy-five percent of agricultural households interviewed in the state reported their crops being affected by the scarcity.

The growing of the tree species also poses an increased risk of wildfire. Farms are highly combustible that Chile ruled out eucalyptus as a viable climate solution after a succession of major blazes in its domestic plantations.

Notwithstanding ecological dangers, eucalyptus plantations continue to have an important function in the carbon market, with trees being sold as emission offsets to fossil fuel polluters to counterbalance their pollution. Despite opposition from campaigners, in {