EL PAÍS offers the América Futura section openly for its daily and global information contribution on sustainable development.
If you want to support our journalism, subscribe
here
.
In recent days, images of Chile devastated by forest fires have gone around the world.
And no wonder, the magnitude is shocking: as of this Monday, at least 123 people have died and more than 12,000 burned houses have been reported in the Valparaíso region, in the central-southern area of the country.
The brutality is such that the president of Chile, Gabriel Boric, has declared two days of national mourning.
The magnitude is shocking, but the news of forest fires is anything but unusual.
Every year, newspaper headlines report that forest fires return to Chile.
The reality is that they never left;
On the contrary, they are increasing in both frequency and intensity.
So much so that those that occurred in Chile in 2017, also in the central area of the country, forced the scale with which fires were measured globally to be modified.
And yet, they continue to be handled as if they were an unexpected surprise.
The reality is that, every year, thousands of hectares are consumed by fire, leaving behind significant human and material losses.
I consult the Global Forest Watch platform, a digital tool that monitors the state of forests globally.
I focus on Chile and explore the map.
I add a layer with information about “forest cover”: the central-southern area of the country is covered in green.
I add the layer “forest cover lost due to forest fires”: the south-central area is painted brown.
So far, no surprises and implacable logic: there are more forest fires where there are more forests.
Another layer yields more interesting information: the main trigger of deforestation in Chile is forest plantations, especially in the central area of the country.
In other words, the native forest is gradually replaced by monocultures, large areas of a single species of tree that fulfill a specific purpose: that of feeding one of the most powerful extractive forest industries in Latin America.
There are figures behind it: about 20% of the native forest has been replaced by a combination of degraded bushland and grasslands, agricultural land and forest plantations.
Of all the deforestation that occurs in the country, 82% occurs in native forests.
The platform has its limitations.
For example, you can't tell me whether forest plantations burn faster and more frequently than native forests.
Chile's official data cannot give me this information either.
They apparently make no distinction: when the forest burns, it seems to matter little what type of forest is burned.
But the reality is that it does matter, since a native forest and a forest plantation are far from fulfilling the same ecosystem functions.
A native forest is distinguished by the great variability of species it protects, both plants and animals;
due to the diversity of ages and stages of development of the species.
Thus, we have denser forest zones, punctuated by forest clearings, and more or less humid areas.
In short, it is a very heterogeneous environment.
A forest plantation is the complete opposite: it strives to maintain the most homogeneous conditions possible on the largest area of land because its sole objective is to produce wood.
Therefore, a single tree species of the same age, with ground cover that does not vary, is favored.
In Chile, there are more than three million hectares of pine and eucalyptus monocultures.
A forest management model supported and favored by different decrees that allowed the country to position itself as the second producer of cellulose in Latin America.
This extractivist model developed in a chaotic and poorly regulated manner.
Thus, certain precautions were omitted, such as having firebreak surfaces between plantations;
maintain protected areas to avoid plantations near rivers, springs, streams or completely surrounding entire communities.
In addition, they are exotic species: eucalyptus is particularly prone to burning and requires significant amounts of water.
This strongly impacts the availability of water in the region and the quality of the soils.
Plantations also play an important role in the spread of fires.
Some fires, although they can be destructive, have certain important ecological benefits.
They occur periodically and naturally and allow dead or diseased vegetation to be eliminated, clearings to be formed in a forest, which favors the development of other types of species.
This natural diversity is one of the key characteristics of a healthy ecosystem.
In this type of environment, fires usually go out on their own, as this heterogeneity creates a discontinuity in the fuel and therefore modifies its advance conditions.
In plantations, this phenomenon does not happen.
It is a homogeneous landscape that is therefore a breeding ground for the excessive spread of a fire that has a long extension to which it can expand and feed.
In addition, the proximity to communities and cities makes it even more deadly.
Data from the National Forestry Corporation show that in 2017, 54% of the area damaged by fires occurred in forest plantations, less than 18% would have occurred in native forest.
The environmental and social impacts of the forestry industry are well documented.
And these are exacerbated by climate change.
Chile is one of the ten most vulnerable countries: a sharp increase in temperatures is expected, coupled with water stress throughout the country.
Currently, it is estimated that the average rainfall is 20% less than in past years.
This is particularly accentuated in the central area of the country, in an almost permanent state of mega drought.
The authorities point out that there is intention behind the fires.
Of course it is crucial that these people face justice.
However, we must not forget other more diffuse culprits: the State and forestry companies, which are essential elements in this deadly triad exacerbated by climate change.
President Gabriel Boric assured that it is the greatest tragedy that Chile has experienced since the great earthquake of February 27, 2010, which left hundreds of victims due to the earthquake and a tsunami.
However, the difference is brutal.
This new tragedy does not occur in a vacuum and what is even more tragic: it is not an exceptional situation.
Andrea Bizberg
has a master's degree in environmental policy from Sciences Po and Environmental Sciences from Paris Sorbonne VI.
She currently works as an advisor for Latin America on air quality and climate change at
C40 Cities
.
She has worked as an environmental policy advisor for Harvard University, the Economist Intelligence Unit and the UN, among others.