Strategic investment initiatives like the Brazil Climate and Ecological Transformation Investment Platform (BIP) are also central to this growth.
Safeguards
The bioeconomy also encompasses biotechnology, strategic minerals, the restoration and sustainable management of natural vegetation, agricultural bio-inputs, waste management, regenerative farming, tourism, fishery, and other emerging industries.
In July 2025, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) approved a US$1 billion loan to back Brazil’s ambitious policy reforms as part of its ecological transformation plan.
Central to this effort is Eco Invest Brasil, a partnership between the IDB and the Brazilian government. Eco Invest aims to mobilise around US$10.8 billion in resources by 2027, with the majority coming from the private sector.
Eco Invest, though presented as a sustainability-focused initiative, has raised concerns among civil society groups and environmental observers.
Critics point to recent regulatory changes that may weaken environmental oversight and reduce protections for Indigenous and traditional communities, particularly if projects proceed without robust consultation or safeguards.
Conversion
There are also warnings about potential risks related to land use, carbon markets, and the need for stronger governance to ensure the initiative aligns with environmental and human rights standards.
A 2023 paper published in Ecological Economics warns that the ambiguity surrounding the bioeconomy concept poses serious risks to both the Amazon’s ecosystems and its communities.
Across the globe, a wide range of actors, from NGOs and government bodies at every level to private corporations, are promoting the bioeconomy as a path forward.
Yet, beneath this promise lies a risk: the push for biofuel monocultures like soybean and palm oil plantations, which carry serious socio-environmental consequences.
In Brazil, the widespread use of feedstocks such as sugarcane, palm oil, corn, and soybean spark intense debate. These crops, often presented as green alternatives, compete directly with food production and drive the alarming conversion of vital agricultural land into fuel production zones.
Ecosystems
Take açaí, for example, the Amazon’s flagship bioeconomy product, valued at over US$1 billion (IBGE, 2023). While its market is considered a success, the rapid expansion of açaí cultivation has come at a heavy cost: accelerating biodiversity loss and increasing social vulnerabilities within local communities.
Most profoundly, the article warns that the very framework of the bioeconomy, as currently designed, falls short in its ability to truly protect the Amazon and other richly biodiverse, socio-ecological landscapes.
Without urgent clarity and a committed, holistic approach, the promise of the bioeconomy risks becoming a threat to the land and people it aims to serve.
The term bioeconomy is increasingly used to describe a wide range of land-use practices, but a study published in the Forest Policy and Economics journal highlights the dangers of grouping together two fundamentally opposing models: industrial plantation economies and community-based sociobiodiverse systems.
While the former prioritises large-scale monocultures like soy and eucalyptus, often at the expense of ecosystems and traditional communities, the latter supports biodiversity, local livelihoods, and sustainable forest use.
Pillars
The authors argue that merging these approaches under a single term obscure critical social and environmental conflicts and call for clearer policy distinctions to support truly sustainable, biodiversity-driven economies.
Additionally, the study also raises concerns about the Amazônia 4.0 project for promoting a high-tech, market-driven “bioeconomy” in the Amazon that risks reproducing capitalist, extractivist, and colonial dynamics under a sustainability guise.
While presented to harness biodiversity for local development, the authors argue it frames Indigenous and agroforestry practices within the same economic logic as large-scale monocultures, invites massive capital and infrastructure into sensitive forest areas, and overlooks power inequalities, social conflicts, and the potential erosion of Indigenous cosmologies and autonomy.
Dr Ossi Ollinaho is a lecturer at the global development studies of the University of Helsinki and the lead author of the study. He told The Ecologist: “The extension of this concept [of bioeconomy] to the Amazon and similar high sociobiodiversity contexts carries the inherent risk of it ending up being pulped and sold for profit.”
Brazil’s National Bioeconomy Commission (CNBio) was established as the governing body for the country’s national bioeconomy strategy, officially launched by the federal government under decree 12.044 on 5 June 2024.
The commission’s primary role is to define the strategic pillars that will shape Brazil’s bioeconomy development plan (PNDBio). CNBio consists of 34 members, evenly split between representatives from the federal government and civil society.
Stewardship
The latter group includes stakeholders from the private sector, academia, financial institutions, environmental NGOs, Indigenous peoples, traditional communities, and family farmers.
To advance its mission, CNBio formed three specialised working groups via resolution CNBio 02/2025. The first group focuses on bioindustry and biomanufacturing, the second addresses biomass, and the third concentrates on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems as well as sociobioeconomy, with particular emphasis on the forest economy, fishing, tourism, and sociobiodiversity.
Brazil ranks as the world’s most biodiverse country, hosting up to 20 per cent of the world’s species (9,000 species of vertebrates and 42,000 of plants), across six distinct biomes (the Amazon rainforest, Cerrado, Atlantic Forest, Caatinga, Pampas, and the Pantanal).
The Legal Amazon covers nearly 60 per cent of Brazil’s territory and comprises nine states: Pará, Amazonas, Amapá, Roraima, Rondônia, Acre, Tocantins, Mato Grosso, and Maranhão. (IBGE, 2023-a).
As the world struggles with climate change and shrinking resources, all eyes are on Brazil, not just for its biodiversity, but for what can be extracted from it. For some, this is less about environmental stewardship and more about turning nature into profit.
Extraction
Brazil now faces a critical question: will this moment serve the planet and its people, or just open the door to a new wave of exploitation dressed in green?
In 2023, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) teamed up with Brazil’s Ministry of Trade and Services to launch a new initiative called the Amazon Bioeconomy Business Mapping study.
The goal? To explore business opportunities in the Amazon based on the idea of building an economy that works with nature, not against it.
The study looked at several sectors. It found big potential in forest products, both timber (PFM) and non-timber (PFNM).
There’s particular interest in timber extraction, which has been legally regulated under “sustainable” forest management practices since 1965. The report suggests that there’s still plenty of room to expand this type of activity using native Amazon species.
Opportunities
Fishing and aquaculture are also in the spotlight. Native fish like the pirarucu (Arapaima gigas) and tambaqui (Colossoma macropomum) are being eyed for commercial expansion.
In fact, Brazil created the Genomic Editing Centre for Aquaculture Fish (CNPASA) in 2023, and by 2024, Embrapa (Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation) had already produced the first genetically modified tambaquis.
Scientists are now working to develop tambaquis without intermuscular bones, and they’re also experimenting with genetically edited tilapia designed to grow faster and produce more meat by turning off the gene responsible for regulating muscle growth. The goal? Scale up production and get these fish on more dinner tables both in Brazil and abroad.
Tourism in Brazil’s conservation areas (UCs) was highlighted in the study as a potential tool for protecting forests within the broader bioeconomy.
While the study points to strong opportunities in this sector, it doesn’t seem to fully consider the possible social and environmental impacts that could come with expanding tourism in these protected areas.
Incentives
Brazil is clearly standing at a crossroads. On one side, there’s an opportunity to lead the way in sustainable development. On the other, there’s a risk of repeating old mistakes, exploiting nature for short-term gain while calling it something new. The world is watching to see which path the country will choose.
At the G20 summit held in Brazil last November, discussions around bioeconomy policies and strategies took centre stage. Brazil used the occasion to launch the Global Bioeconomy Initiative (GIB), laying out 10 high-level principles aimed at guiding the development of bioeconomy efforts both nationally and globally.
According to the G20 executive summary titled Pathways to a Sustainable Bioeconomy, Brazil’s bioeconomy covers a wide range of sectors: industrial biomanufacturing and biotechnology, agrifood systems and agriculture, bioenergy and biofuels, ecosystem restoration and regeneration, and sociobioeconomy value chains rooted in local communities.
Despite its potential, the summary points out several challenges. Access to international markets for sociobioeconomy products remains limited.
There’s also a lack of financing tools and incentives to support growth in the sector, alongside serious gaps in processing facilities and transport infrastructure.
Protection
The push to grow the bioeconomy, especially in the Amazon, brings with it a wave of difficult questions.
While the development of this sector will require major infrastructure investments, such as new roads, power grids, transport, facilities, these changes also carry serious environmental and social risks.
Expanding infrastructure to support the bioeconomy could lead to faster urbanisation and rising pollution in one of the most ecologically sensitive areas on Earth.
Studies have shown that projects like the reconstruction of the BR-319 highway, a key piece of the region’s bioeconomy development, often go hand in hand with deforestation, habitat loss, and increased pressure on Indigenous and traditional communities.
As Brazil moves forward with its plans, striking the right balance between economic opportunity, environmental protection, and social justice remains one of the country’s biggest challenges.
Social
Bioenergy and biofuels are central to Brazil’s climate strategy. But rising mandates for ethanol and biodiesel are driving relentless expansion of sugarcane, soy, corn, and palm oil, of then at the expense of food systems and ecosystems.
Jorge Ernesto Rodriguez Morales is a lecturer and researcher in environmental policy and climate change governance at the Department of Economic History and International Relations at Stockholm University.
He explained: “Like food production, ethanol requires land, water, and nutrients, meaning that a large-scale expansion could intensify the negative side effects of agricultural growth.
“Positioning bioenergy as a climate strategy has effectively justified broader policies supporting the biofuel industry and contributed to the greenwashing of Brazil’s climate policy on the international stage. Several countries have mirrored Brazil’s approach, adopting bioenergy into their climate agendas in response.”
The Brazilian Sustainable Taxonomy (TSB) represents an effort by the government to align financial flows with environmental and social objectives.
Transformation
Positioned as a key instrument in the fight against the climate crisis, it seeks to identify economic activities that align with environmental and social sustainability.
However, its initial focus on a small group of commodities, including soy, corn, cattle, coffee, cocoa, eucalyptus, pirarucu, tilapia and tambaqui, has prompted discussion about whether the selection reflects environmental priorities or prevailing economic interests.
There is concern that, without clearly defined and rigorous criteria, the taxonomy could inadvertently support existing practices rather than driving meaningful change.
This raises a broader concern: amid a global climate emergency, it is essential that sustainability frameworks remain robust and grounded in tangible outcomes.
If sustainability is defined more by procedural formalities than by real environmental results, there is a risk that the taxonomy could be perceived as allowing surface-level compliance rather than driving genuine transformation.
Sustainable
Additionally, given the significant involvement of major economic sectors in shaping the taxonomy, questions have emerged around how to ensure transparency and guard against unintended influences that might weaken its environmental credibility.
As COP30 approaches, Brazil faces a defining moment. The bioeconomy could become a powerful engine for justice and regeneration, or it could repeat the old story, where corporations profit from nature while the communities who protect it are sidelined.
If driven by financial interests alone, the Amazon risks becoming just another asset on a balance sheet, and sustainability reduced to a convenient label. This is not innovation, it’s business as usual in a green disguise.
But Brazil can choose another way. With its deep cultural knowledge, grassroots leadership, and global influence, the country has the power to shape a bioeconomy that puts people and ecosystems first.
COP30 offers a critical platform to shift the narrative, from one of extraction and exclusion to one of inclusion and respect. This is Brazil’s moment to lead with purpose and prove that a just, sustainable future is not only necessary, but possible.
This Author
Monica Piccinini is a regular contributor to The Ecologist and a freelance writer focused on environmental, health and human rights issues.