Subsídios de fontes abertas de dados voltados para inteligência e combate de crimes ambientais: um estudo de caso da operação Arquimedes

Abstract

Faced with intense destructive processes of the Amazon Forest, such as deforestation, illegal logging and land grabbing, the importance of obtaining reliable information on wood production in the Amazon is clear for the management of the forest sector. Presently, these factors have made it difficult to effectively administrate and regulate what cannot be measured. The objective of this research was to identify, from open sources of official statistical data on wood production, the factors that influence the generation of information. Moreover, this compilation of figures and trends would facilitate the comparing of information regarding the production of native logs in the State of Amazonas disclosed by the main command and control bodies of the sector. Currently, the bodies responsible for inspecting logging and disseminating data on the production of native logs are, the Federal Police, the Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) and the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). Data collection was carried out utilizing documentary consultations from the System for issuing Documents of Forest Origin (SisDOF), a division of IBAMA, and through referencing all commercial transactions of native wood logs, in the State of Amazonas, as well as available data in the IBGE's “Production of Plant Extractivism and Forestry (PEVS) report from 2013 to 2018”.For the case study, more than 1700 log packing lists seized in Operation Archimedes between 2014 and 2019 were analyzed. The comparison between the average volume of native wood in logs between the years examined resulted in an overestimation of 47% of the data provided by IBGE, in relation to the average volume of the same period found in IBAMA. The case study found, that for almost every year, the declaration of claims in SisDOF was higher than the real value obtained in the packing list. The sum of the volume of credits was 16.84% higher than the sum of the volumes of packing slips. For 2019 alone, the declared volume was 145% greater than the volume of logs that the company had in the yard. Additionally, regarding the declaration of the essence of the logs by the company, similar discrepancies indicated evidence of fraud. It was concluded that the data collection method has a direct influence on the results presented by the institutions, thereby being vital to have an integrated and a methodological standardization between them. Furthermore, the information from the log lists compared with the declarations made in the Forest Origin Document – ​​DOF, suggested the evidence of possible fraud.