GEO-Brazil

Brazil

GEO Brazil Water Resources is the first report of the GEO Brazil
Brazil
Series. By exploring prospects opened up by use of the GEO
methodology, it aims to contribute toward a comprehensive
and integrated evaluation of concepts and premises, and of the
OR DE M E
PRO
GR
ES
SO
Water Resources
Executive Summary
Component of a Series of Reports on the
Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
organizational and legal framework and management instruments
that comprise the National Water Resources System (SINGREH).

Water Resources
Publication of this report takes on special significance, as it marks
the tenth anniversary of the enactment of Brazil’s Water Law (Law
9.433, of January 8, 1997).

Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Ministry of
Environment
N AT I O N A L WAT E R A G E N C Y
N AT I O N A L WAT E R A G E N C Y
 GEO Brazil
Water Resources
Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the
Environment in Brazil

Executive Summary
Federative Republic of Brazil
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva
President

José Alencar Gomes da Silva

Vice-President

Ministry of Environment
Marina Silva
Minister

Cláudio Langone
Executive Secretary

João Bosco Senra

Secretary for Water Resources

Volney Zanardi Júnior

Director of the Department for Institutional Articulation

National Water Agency – ANA

Board of Directors
José Machado – Director President
Benedito Braga
Oscar de Morais Cordeiro Netto
Bruno Pagnoccheschi
Dalvino Troccoli Franca

United Nations Environment Programme – UNEP

Achim Steiner
Executive Director

Ricardo Sanchez-Sosa
Regional Director for Latin America and the Caribbean

Cristina Montenegro
Coordinator of the UNEP Office in Brazil
NATIONAL WATER AGENCY UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME

GEO Brazil
Water Resources
Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the
Environment in Brazil

Executive Summary

National Water Agency – ANA

Brasilia – DF
January / 2007
c National Water Agency – ANA c MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT– MMA
Setor Policial – Área 5 - Quadra 3 – Bloco L Esplanada dos Ministérios – Bloco B
CEP 70610 - 200 – Brasília-DF CEP 70068 - 901 – Brasília-DF
PABX: (61) 2109 5400 PABX: (61) 4009 1000
http://www.ana.gov.br http://www.mma.gov.br

c United Nations Environment Programme – UNEP

Setor Comercial Norte – SCN Quadra 2 – Bloco A - Ed. Corporate
Financial Center 110 andar - Módulo 1.101
CEP 70712 - 901 – Brasília-DF
PABX: (61) 3038 9233
http://www.UNEP.org/brasil

Graphic Design:
TDA - Desenho & Arte Ltda.
www.tdabrasil.com.br

English Translation
RAPPORT traduções e interpretação Ltda.
George Aune

All rights reserved.

Reproduction of data and information contained in this publication
is permitted, provided the source is cited.

Disclaimer.
The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the
opinions or policies of UNEP or of the Brazilian Government.

Source catalogue - CEDOC – library

G342g GEO Brazil : water resources : component of a series of reports on the status
and prospects for the environment in Brazil : executive summary. /
National Water Agency ; United Nations Environment Programme.
Brasilia : ANA; PNUMA, 2007.
60 p. : il. (GEO Brazil Tematic Series : GEO Brazil Water
Resources)

ISBN: 978-85-89629-22-5

1. Water Resources. 2. Water Resources Management. I. National

Water Resources (Brazil). II. United Nations Environment Programme.

CDU 556.18 (81) (047.32) = 111

This document was submitted to the ANA editorial council.

 GEO Brazil
Water Resources
Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the
Environment in Brazil

General Coordination:

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT
Volney Zanardi Júnior
Director of the Department for Institutional Articulation
Executive Secretariat

National Water Agency

Bruno Pagnoccheschi
Director of the Information Area

United Nations Environment Programme

Cristina Montenegro
Coordinator of the UNEP Office in Brazil

Technical Supervision Group

Evandro Mateus Moretto – DAI/SECEX/MMA
Marco José Melo Neves – SRH/MMA
Maria Bernadete Ribas Lange – UNEP/ROLAC/Office in Brazil.
Marly Santos Silva – DAI/SECEX/MMA
Kakuko Nagatani Yoshida – UNEP/ Division of Early Warning and Assessment (DEWA-LAC)

Research and Production Group

Antonio Eduardo Leão Lanna
Francisco José Lobato da Costa – Editor
Gilberto Valente Canali
Maria de Fátima Chagas Dias Coelho
Ulisses Lacava

Executive Coordinator: Regina Gualda – ANA

Collaborators (in alphabetical order)

Ana Lucia Dolabella José Edil Benedito

Antonio Félix Dominguez Luis André Muniz
André Trigueiro Luiz Augusto Bronzatto
Antonio Luitgards Moura Luiz Correa Noronha
Augusto Franco Malo da Silva Bragança Lupércio Ziroldo Antonio
Carlos Motta Nunes Marcelo Pires da Costa
Cláudia Enk Magaly Gonzáles de Oliveira
Claúdia Ferreira Lima Maria Cristina de Sá Oliveira Matos de Brito
Danielle Bastos Serra de Alencar Ramos Maria Leonor Baptista Esteves
Déa Solange Fernandes Maria Manuela Martins Alves Moreira
Eduardo Felipe Cavalcante de Correa Oliveira Mário Edson Vieira de França
Eldis Camargo Marley Caetano de Mendonça
Emiliano Ribeiro de Souza Marco Alexandro Silva André
Fábio Feldmann Marcos Airton de Souza Freitas
Fabrício Bueno da Fonseca Cardoso Maria do Socorro Lima Castello Branco
Francisco Lopes Viana Maurício Andrés
Gisela Damm Forattini Moisés Pinto Gomes
Herman Antunes Laurindo dos Santos Ney Maranhão
Hilda Verônica Kessler Ninon Machado de Faria Leme Franco
Hidely Grassi Rizzo Paulo Augusto Cunha Libânio
Horácio da Silva Figueiredo Junior Paulo R. Haddad
Humberto Cardoso Gonçalves Raimundo Alves de Lima Filho
Hypérides Macedo Rodrigo Flecha Ferreira Alves
Jerson Kelman Rosana Garjulli
João Bosco Senra Rubem La Laina Porto
João Climaco Soares de Mendonça Filho Sergio Augusto Barbosa
João Gilberto Lotufo Conejo Valdemar Santos Guimarães
Joaquim Guedes Correa Gondim Filho Vaneide Ramos de Lima
John Briscoe Vera Maria da Costa Nascimento
Vicente Paulo Pereira BarbosaVieira
Wilde Cardoso Gontijo Junior
Photo: Arquivo ANA
Foreword
Agenda 21, approved fifteen years ago at the
United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, foresaw the need to implement integrated
water resources management. It raised concern at the
widespread scarcity of freshwater resources in many of
the world’s regions and warned of the limitations that
water scarcity imposes upon development in various
countries. Indeed, Agenda 21 stated that: “the holistic
management of freshwater as a finite and vulnerable
resource and the integration of sectoral water plans and
programs within the framework of national economic
and social policy are of paramount importance for
action in the 1990s and beyond”.
The United Nations Development Programme’s
Human Development Report of 2006, by drawing a
parallel between the eight Millennium Goals approved
in 2000 and increasing demands for water and
sanitation, clearly illustrated the intimate relationship
between the goals and adequate treatment of water
resources. With respect to the goal of eradicating
extreme poverty and hunger, the report stated that,
in the developing world, one in five persons has no
access to adequate drinking water; that poor families
pay ten times as much for water as rich families; and
that the inexorable reallocation of water from farming
to industry threatens to exacerbate rural poverty.
Estimates show that, by 2025, the number of
people living in countries where water resources are
under greatest pressure will have increased from the
current level of 700 million, to over 3 billion. Today,
more than 1.4 billion people live in river basins where
demand for water exceeds minimum replacement
values, thus contributing toward the drying up of rivers
and depletion of groundwater reserves. By 2080, water
insecurity and climate change are likely to increase the
number of undernourished people worldwide, from the
current figure of 75 million, to 125 million.
Despite Agenda 21 and the UNDP’s Human
Development Report, the situation on the planet has
hardly improved. Though problems identified have
not been resolved, we have learned something of the
complexity, time horizons, and dynamic processes
involved. We have gained awareness of the need to
develop new and dynamic thinking patterns so as to
address recurrent issues in pursuit of the best possible
tradeoff between present adverse conditions and utopian
solutions. We have now reached a point from which we
can more clearly view the paths leading toward our goal
of achievable and equitable human development.
Questions surrounding the equitable and
sustainable use of freshwater resources clearly
illustrate the impasses, caveats, and potential of such
paths. Whereas 70.8% of the surface of our planet is
covered by water, it is surely a paradox that, of the
2.2% of the Earth’s water that is potable, a mere 0.3%
is readily available to humankind.
Brazilians, especially, are faced with a colossal
challenge. Covering practically half of the South
American continent, Brazil holds 60% of the
Amazon Basin, through which flows one fifth of the
world’s freshwater supplies. Holding so significant
an asset, in an era of global water shortages, implies
that Brazilians must assume a responsible strategic
management approach to this precious heritage, and
provide leadership in global water resources issues.
Within Brazil, we are faced with the paradox of
having, adjacent to the abundantly-watered Amazon
basin, a region chronically afflicted by water shortages.
Approaches for dealing with these extreme situations
must entail integration of public policy instruments,
articulation among all governmental policies affecting
water resources, and enhancements in mechanisms
for fostering social participation in decision making,
in deployment of actions, in supervision, and in
permanent evaluation activities.
Water resources management in Brazil was
much enhanced in the early 1980s when a three-
pronged approach was adopted, focusing upon:
environmental­, social, and economic sustainability;
the quest for an appropriate regulatory framework
and institutional structure; and formulation of an
appropriate descriptive and operational model for the
new policy arrangements and social pacts necessary for
promoting grass-roots representation and participatory
management of public policies.
Drafting and approval of the National Water
Resources Management System (SINGREH), foreseen
in the 1988 Federal Constitution and in Law 9.433
of January 8, 1997, were landmark achievements.
Today, the efforts of various protagonists dedicated
to promoting full deployment of SINGREH, and
of the National Environment System (SISNAMA),
have brought about a sea change in governmental
approaches to social and environmental policy. These
efforts have coalesced into key elements of current
policies pursued by the Ministry of Environment under
the current Administration, building upon progress
achieved in previous periods, and advances made by
the Brazilian environmental and socio-environmental
movements.
Huge difficulties remain to be overcome and
structural weaknesses still need to be corrected. These
include resistance on the part of certain segments of the
productive sector to implementation of environmental
protection measures and deployment of integrated
Marina Silva
Minister of State for Environment
water resources management instruments in the
public interest. On the positive side, there is a growing
awareness that we are embarking upon new and critical
phases, on the path toward sustainability, that our
Nation, and indeed the whole Planet, now requires.
Elaboration of new strategic-planning instruments,
such as GEO Water Resources - Brazil, bear witness
to our efforts to achieve sustainability. Courage and
determination are needed to take up the challenges
raised by this report. Perhaps the greatest of such
challenges relates to the implicit commitments that this
publication poses, and that extend beyond the scope
of technical options. These include efforts to mobilize
and prepare Brazilian society to assume the social
and environmental responsibilities of citizenship.
Therein lies true sustainability; the true essence and
justification for our hope.
It is gratifying for the executive managers and staff
of the Ministry of Environment to have participated,
alongside the National Water Agency, and the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), a cherished
international partner with which we share such close
ties, in the initiative that resulted in this report that
so truthfully assesses the potentialities, obstacles that
must be surmounted, and feasibility of our goals for
the future.
Foreword
In terms of water resources, Brazil is renowned as
one of the most abundantly endowed nations on the
planet. Such abundance makes it incumbent upon
us Brazilians, as we fulfill our own needs, to accept
responsibility for the conservation and sustainable use
of these precious resources while, at the same time,
maintaining the planet’s ecological balance and,
ultimately, ensuring the survival of humankind.
In the 1930s, in view of the first evidence of
the toll that burgeoning industrialization and rapid
urbanization were imposing upon the nation’s water
resources, measures were instituted to promote
rational water use. The Water Code of 1934, and the
founding of the National Water and Electric Energy
Department (DNAEE) are evidence of Brazil’s early
efforts to discipline the use of water resources, in the
light of prevailing knowledge and the contemporary
institutional and political culture, the Nation’s social
priorities, and current internationally accepted
standards of sustainability.
This model, in effect for over seventy years,
proved ineffectual in the face of the rapid growth and
burgeoning development challenges that characterized
the final decades of the 20th Century. The mismatch
between the growing intensity of demand for water
on the one hand, and the paucity of investment
in conservation on the other, became increasingly
evident. Moreover, despite the abundance of water
in Brazil, persistent environmental problems and the
emergence of new or previously unperceived threats
led to a consensus that the Nation’s water resources
management system was in need of a thorough
overhaul. This system, though overly centralized and
lacking in scope for social participation, nonetheless
set the premises for State controlled water resources
management, enabled the training of a cadre of highly-
qualified professionals, laid down the bases for training
and technological development, and produced basic
knowledge and information of fundamental importance
for strategic planning of the water-resources sector.
The environmental awareness that emerged in
the 1970s, allied to widespread acceptance in the
José Machado
Director-President of the National Water Agency
1980s and ‘90s of the need to promote sustainable
development, culminating with acceptance of the
perception of water as a scarce resource, have led
to a review of governmental strategies and actions
for implementation of integrated water resources
management.
The cornerstones of this review were: a
mention, in the chapter of the 1988 Federal
Constitution that defines the powers of the
Federal Union, of an obligation to institute a
national water resources management system; the
inauguration (by Law 9.433/97) of the National
Water Resources Management System (SINGREH)
with its administrative structure and management
instruments; the founding of the National Water
Agency, as the federal body responsible for
implementation of the National Water Resources
Policy and coordination of the SINGREH; and
the launching (in 2006) of the National Water
Resources Plan which, aside from ratifying Brazil’s
international commitments toward meeting the
Millennium Goals through actions and programs
to be pursued up until 2020, also provides an
important instrument for governance.
The executive managers of the National Water
Agency are most gratified to see the fruits of efforts
exerted in the production of this publication - GEO
Brazil Water Resources - that results from a successful
partnership between this Agency, the Ministry of
Environment, and the United Nations Environment
Programme.
This publication coincides with the 10th anniversary
of Law 9.433/97, and provides an opportunity for
Brazil to display, to the international community,
the progress it has achieved in deployment of water
resources management instruments. Most certainly,
the analyses and proposals contained herein will
make a significant contribution toward transparent,
democratic, and socially effective natural resources
management, while ensuring that the National Water
Resources Management System is implemented in a
decentralized and participatory manner.
Photo: Zig Koch/Ecotrópica
Foreword
A defining feature of our age is the accelerating
pressure on ecosystems such as forests, wetlands and
soils which is triggering unprecedented and wide-
spread changes in the Earth’s life support systems.
Innovative solutions are required for these complex
challenges. One of the main responses of the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has been
the GEO (Global Environmental Outlook) process.
It is a broad and integrated approach of analysing,
recording and assessing environmental conditions as
they relate to a defined geographic space or theme,
thus permitting operations to be carried out on
different levels, from the municipal to the global.
A vital role of GEO is supporting decision-makers
around the world by providing improved, up to date
and reliable information that can underpin integrated
and sustainable public policies. GEO, besides
being a constantly evolving process, is also a highly
adaptable and versatile tool that can be applied to the
specific requirements of each geographical unit under
consideration.
Brazil has embraced the GEO process and
partnered its development and utilized its outputs
for building knowledge and capacity in sustainable
environmental management.
This new report- GEO Water Resources- has
for example been produced by the Ministry of the
Environment of Brazil, the National Water Agency
(ANA) and a significant group of Brazilian institutions
and specialists. The report was prepared in association
with the UNEP Office in Brazil, and with technical
support provided by UNEP’s Division of Early Warning
and Assessment (DEWA-LAC).
This is the first of a series of thematic reports
on the state of and outlook for the environment in
Brazil. It is a continuation and updating of the work
initiated by GEO Brazil I which was launched at the
World Summit on Sustainable Development held in
Johannesburg in 2002.
The decision to continue the GEO process as
a series of reports on Brazil – and with a focus on
environmental management – not only recognizes the
size and diversity of the country but also acknowledges
that the country has the political, technical and
Achim Steiner
Executive Director of UNEP
institutional conditions necessary to move forward to
effectively administer its natural resources.
The focus on water resources management
– perhaps the most vital and strategic resource for a
sustainable future – is a reflection of the importance
of the theme, the magnitude of the resources and the
complexity of managing these in a country such as
Brazil, whether because of its continental extension,
or because it has one of the largest water resources
in the world.
Another unique feature of this work is that it goes
beyond analysing the status, availability and quality
of water resources and includes the construction of
scenarios that project the future outlook for the year
2020. The report makes an in-depth analysis of matters
such as planning and management instruments
adopted in the country; it also addresses aspects
relating to participatory management and economic
instruments in order to make recommendations
– recommendations designed to achieve ever
more effective tools to formulate policies aimed at
conserving and managing water bodies in Brazil in a
sustainable manner.
Indeed the report considers the importance of water
in the broadest sense and as an input for innumerable
economic activities, ranging from providing vital support
for the country’s vast biodiversity to its use to improve
quality of life and permit development at all levels.
Besides being the first Latin American country
to prepare its National Water Resources Plan, Brazil
has well-established environmental institutions
and installed capacities capable of meeting the
challenges the country faces. This puts it in a position
to systematically advance towards meeting the
Millennium Development Goals, particularly those
aimed at combating poverty and increasing access to
potable water and sanitation services.
Water is not only a critical resource in terms of
the environment and human security; it also presents
great opportunities for new advances to be made
in terms of sustainable development. As is the case
with other subjects to be dealt with in the GEO Brazil
series, and consolidated in the GEO Brazil II report, it
is hoped that this report will help Brazil to fully meet
its sustainable development demands.
Photo: Arquivo TDA
Table of Contents
Forewords 9
Introduction 17

GEO conceptual framework of the GEO process 18

I – Status of water resources in Brazil 19
II – Pressure and impacts 29
III – Responses 33
III.1 – Background 33
III.2 – Paradigm change: SINGREH 37
IV – Scenarios 52
V – Recommendations 55

Lists
Graphs
1. Worldwide distribution of surface freshwater 20
2. Distribution of surface freshwater on the American continent 20
3. Surface area 22
4. Population 22
5. Population density 22
6. Urbanization 22
7. Mean flow 23
8. Specific discharge 23
9. Water availability 23
10. Specific water availability 23
11. Exploitable renewable groundwater resources 23
12. Specific exploitable renewable groundwater resources 23
13. Total abstractions (m3/s) 24
14. Total abstractions (% of water availability) 24
15. Total abstractions (% of mean flow) 24
16. Total abstractions by area 24
17. Total abstractions per person 25
18. Categories of water use by region 26
19. Basic sanitation coverage in urban areas of Brazil’s hydrographic regions 27
20. BOD5 loads 29
21. Licensed flows, by category of use 42
22. Investments in sewerage up until 2020, to achieve the goal of universal services 54

Map
1. The 12 hydrographic regions and political administrative map of Brazil 21

Boxes
1. The Amazon basin 30
2. National hydrometeorological network 44
3. Territorial bases and the water resources management map 51

Tables
1. Types of electric power generation in Brazil 34
2. Investments required in water supply and sewerage systems up until 2020, to achieve the goal of
universal services, by hydrographic region 53
3. State level water resources management instruments 45

Figures
1. General structure of SINGREH 38
2. Breakdown of PNRH information
(A) Brazil, (B) national hydrographic division and (C) 56 planning units 41
Photo: Arquivo TDA
Introduction
Since Brazil is endowed with so generous a portion
of the Planet’s water resources, it bears a special
responsibility for conservation and adequate management
of this heritage.
Brazil has been an active participant in all the
principal international forums and initiatives relating to
the theme of water resources: universal access to water;
conservation and management of water and of related
environmental resources; the economic importance of
water; and the role of such resources in development
policies.
Moreover, Brazil is party to the main conventions and
international declarations relating directly or indirectly
to water resources issues, including: the Millennium
Declaration; Agenda 21; the United Nations Convention on
Biologi­cal Diversity; the RAMSAR Convention; the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; and
the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification.
In the South-American context, Brazil has sought to
contribute toward a broader analysis of water resources
management problems and challenges, with the aim of
achieving better coordination and integration for the
benefit of all countries of the continent.
Such commitments are in line with the principles
enunciated in Brazil’s National Water Resources Policy.
This Policy encompasses the National Water Resources
Management System (SINGREH), and a set of innovative
strategies and instruments developed and adopted over
the past decade to provide society and public managers
with state-of-the-art integrated and participatory
instruments for the management of the Nation’s water
resources. These include the National Water Resources
Plan, approved in 2006.
Since 1995, the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) has been engaged in a bold global
environmental evaluation exercise, known as Global
Environment Outlook (GEO), that focuses on a variety
of geographic and thematic aspects at different levels.
In Brazil, this process has been conducted within the
scope of the National Environment Information System
(SINIMA) in the form of a Thematic Series that aims to
disclose consistent information and integrated analyses,
with a view to enabling continual enhancement of
environmental management processes in Brazil.
GEO Brazil Water Resources is a contribution
toward this effort, and the first report of the GEO Brazil
Series. With 267 pages, the report builds upon prospects
opened up by the GEO methodology, and provides a
comprehensive and integrated review of concepts and
premises, of the institutional and legal framework, and of
water resources management instruments that currently
comprise the National Water Resources Management
System (SINGREH).
This Executive Summary is an integral part of the
GEO Brazil Water Resources report, and provides a
summary of the information and conclusions presented
in the complete version which is available for download
at the National Water Agency website (www.ana.gov.
br). Since this summary is targeted at a broader and
less specialized audience, some of its chapters contain
simplified explanatory texts not found in the full report.
This volume of the GEO Brazil Series presents a
set of essential information and recommendations for
public policy formulation and implementation. It aims
to promote sustainable access and conservation of water
resources and better governance.
Furthermore, GEO Brazil Water Resources will
provide inputs for actions and policies targeted at meeting
water-related objectives of the Millennium Development
Goals, a pledge signed by 189 countries at the United
Nations Millennium Summit, in September 2000.
Within this context, water resources play a
fundamental role in general socioeconomic development,
and in efforts to fulfill objectives under no less than four
of the eight Millennium Development Goals: Goal 4
– reduce infant mortality; Goal 5 – improve maternal
health; Goal 6 – combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other
diseases; and Target 10 of Goal 7 – reduce by half, by
2015, the proportion of people without sustainable
access to safe drinking water and sanitation.
The references GEO Brazil Water Resources provides on
issues relating to water resources will most certainly enable
Brazil to improve its current policies and instruments, by
fostering sustainable water resources management, and
contributing toward regional and global initiatives for
ensuring the protection of such resources, both within the
scope of initiatives of United Nations agencies, and of
bilateral relations with other countries.
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
Conceptual framework of the GEO process
Since 1995, the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) has been engaged in an integrated
environmental evaluation project known as the Global
Environment Outlook (GEO). The GEO process may
be applied to a variety of different geographic spaces,
be they defined by natural boundaries (biomes,
eco-regions, continents, etc.) or determined by human
society (cities, states, countries, and regions).
GEO adopts a scientifically sound pressure-
status-impact-response (PSIR) approach, based upon
which it develops projections for future scenarios,
proposals, and recommendations. Its components are
interactive and, at the same time, reflect the dynamics
of relationships between natural environments and
human society.
Based upon this integrated situation analysis, the
next step in the GEO process entails projection of
scenarios, to assist in policy formulation and decision
making for environmental management.
The development of scenarios involves the
selection of spatial and temporal parameters; the
definition of themes, variables and indicators to be
considered; analyses of cause-effect relationships;
and the construction of mathematical and/or narrative
models.
The following questions guide each component of
the analytical process:
• What is happening to the environment? (status)
– analysis of the status of the environment,
encompassing current observed qualitative and
quantitative factors in a given geographic space or
sector;
• Why is it happening? (pressure) – analysis of
anthropogenic factors that change the natural
18
balance of environmental conditions in space and
time;
• What is the impact of this? (impact) - analysis of
immediate effects on the environment and on the
quality of human life, resulting from pressures –
changes in qualitative and quantitative indicators;
• What policies have been adopted to face up to
environmental problems? (responses) - analysis
of human interventions - policies, actions,
programs, adaptive responses etc. – currently
adopted in face of problems, their causes, and
consequences;
• What will happen in the future if we do not act
today? (future scenarios) – projection of possible
future scenarios resulting from the currently
observed situation and the impacts resulting
therefrom; and
• What can be done to address current problems?
(proposals and recommendations) - proposals and
recommendations for ensuring a better future.
The final stage of the GEO process cycle entails
preparation of proposals and recommendations that must
be in line with technically-feasible, scientific, economic,
and socio-cultural policy orientations, and which should
contribute toward the decision-making process.
It is important to underscore that the GEO process
is subject to continuous monitoring, evaluation, and
improvement. Thus, over the course of the decade
during which it has been applied, it has been enhanced
and adapted to a variety of scenarios, scales of analysis,
and varying levels of data availability. At each cycle,
the GEO process accumulates new lessons learned,
and reinforces the building of sustainable natural
resources management and development capacities.

I – Status of water resources in Brazil
Geographical and Environmental Context
Brazil is a huge country. With a land area of just
over 8.5 million square kilometers, it covers 47.7% of
the South American landmass and is the world’s fifth
largest nation (after Russia, Canada, China and the
United States). It is also known for the striking diversity
of its landscapes, for the vast wealth of its natural
resources, and for the significant portion of the planet’s
fresh water reserves that lie within its borders.
In terms of climate, warm weather generally
predominates in Brazil - 92% of the country lies in
the inter-tropical zone, and has median temperatures
higher than 20ºC. Six climate types with quite
distinct characteristics can be identified, ranging from
equatorial, with average temperatures reaching as high
as 40ºC and abundant rainfall (over 2,500 mm per
year) predominant in the Amazon region; to the semi-
arid climate characteristic of the Northeast region, with
low rainfall (below 1,000 mm per year) long periods
of drought and a rainy season lasting only three months
of the year. Between these two extremes there are vast
areas under the influence of varying types of tropical
climates (upland tropical, and atlantic tropical); and a
subtropical zone located below the Tropic of Capricorn,
where the greatest annual temperature variations
occur, with hot summers and cold winters and, very
occasionally, snow on high ground.
Climate and rainfall patterns are the determining
factors for Brazil’s water resources, and ultimately
account for the vast networks of rivers containing
immense volumes of water. With the exception of
the headwaters of the Amazon, fed by glaciers and
snowmelt in the Andes, all the waters of Brazil’s rivers
originate from rainfall. The majority of Brazil’s rivers
flow year round; only in the semi-arid region of the
Northeast are there seasonally intermittent rivers.
In terms of relief, Brazil’s mountain ranges generally
attain only fairly modest heights, there being only
one peak above 3,000 meters (Neblina 3,014 meters,
near the border with Venezuela). The predominant
geological formations are plateaus, plains, and
depressions, typically comprised of ancient geological
structures (dating from the Paleozoic to the Mesozoic
eras), though there are also basins with more recent
Executive Summary
sedimentation, such as the floodplains of the Pantanal
of Mato Grosso, parts of the Amazon, and certain
stretches of the northeastern and southern coastline.
Such characteristics have contributed toward
Brazil’s exuberant biodiversity, the wealth and variety
of which are renowned throughout the world. Brazil
has seven continental biomes – Amazon Rainforest,
Cerrado, Caatinga, Atlantic Forest, Pantanal, and
Pampa, each with its own characteristic vegetation
cover and typical animal species. The Amazon
Rainforest Biome, considered the world’s largest
repository of biological diversity, is also the nation’s
largest, covering almost half of Brazil’s landmass
(49.29%). The Atlantic Forest and Cerrado biomes are
also immensely rich in biodiversity. Cerrado (savannah)
vegetation covers much of central Brazil, and is
currently coming under considerable anthropogenic
pressure from the expansion of farming. The Atlantic
Forest, the predominant vegetation in the most densely
populated portions of Brazil’s coastal regions, has also
come under intense anthropogenic pressure. Caatinga
is a vegetation type characterized by dry thorny scrub
with few leaves, found in semi-arid areas of the
Northeast region. The vegetation of the Pantanal is a
consequence of the annual rise and ebb of waters in
the Upper Paraguay River Basin; whereas the Pampa
Biome is typified by vast flat grass plains, that stretch
south from Brazil into Argentina and Paraguay.
Water resources
Brazil is in a privileged position in the world in terms
of availability of water resources. Total average annual
flows of rivers in Brazilian territory amount to 180,000
cubic meters per second (m3/s); by way of illustration,
this is equivalent to 72 olympic swimming pools per
second. This volume corresponds to approximately
12% of the world’s available freshwater resources,
which total 1.5 million1 m3/s. If flows originating
upstream from Brazil’s borders are included, the basins
of the Amazon (86,321,000 m3/s), the Uruguai (878
m3/s) and the Paraguai (595 m3/s), total average flows
amount to some 267,000 m3/s (i.e., roughly 18% of
available surface freshwater flows worldwide).
19
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Graph 1: Worldwide distribution of surface freshwater

Australia and Oceania Europe

Asia 6% 7%
The Americas
32% 46%

Brazil
12% of the total

Africa
9%

Source: Adapted from Unesco

Graph 2: Distribution of surface freshwater on the American Continent

South America North America

60% 34%

Brazil
28% of the total

Central America
6%

Source: Adapted from Unesco

In terms of per-capita distribution, average flows in
Brazil amount to approximately 33,000 cubic meters
per person per year (m3/person/year); i.e., 19 times
greater than minimum value set by the UN (1,700 m3/
person/year), below which a country is considered to
be facing water stress.
Given that average flow levels are not available year
round, actual water availability estimates are in fact lower:
roughly 92,000 m3/s. Nonetheless, this volume is sufficient
to fulfill 57 times the current demand for water, and would
be sufficient to serve a population of up to 32 billion,
practically five times the current world population2.

2
Calculated on the basis of an average consumption of 250 liters per person per day.

20
 Executive Summary

Hydrographic regions
For planning and management purposes, Brazil’s the country by location and river basin into 12
National Water Resources Plan (PNRH), divided Hydrographic Regions.

Map 1: The 12 hydrographic regions and political administrative map of Brazil

RR
AP

AM
MA CE
PA RN
PB
PI
PE
AC AL
TO SE
RO
BA

MT

DF
GO

MG
ES
MS

SP RJ

PR

SC

RS

Amazon
Amazon
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region Parnaíba
Parnaíba
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region
East Atlantic
East Atlantic
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region São Francisco
São Francisco
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region
Western
Western
Northeast
Northeast
Atlantic
Atlantic
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region Tocantins
Tocantins
Araguaia
Araguaia
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region
Eastern
Eastern
Northeast
Northeast
Atlantic
Atlantic
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region Uruguay
Uruguay
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region
Southeast
Southeast
Atlantic
Atlantic
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region Paraguay
Paraguay
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region
SouthSouth
Atlantic
Atlantic
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region Paraná
Paraná
Hydrographic
Hydrographic
Region
Region

21
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Brazil’s largest hydrographic region is the Amazon,
covering 3,870 km²; whereas its most populous is the
Paraná hydrographic region, with a population of
almost 55 million. Population density is highest in the
Atlantic Southeast hydrographic region, which has
118 people per square kilometer; in stark contrast to
the Amazon region, where population density is only
2 people per square kilometer.
Low population density in the Amazon region
contrasts with a relatively high proportion (67%) of the
regional population that lives in towns. For Brazil as
whole, the urbanization rate is 81%, reflecting intense
migration from the countryside to the cities over the
past 60 years, in the wake of rapid industrialization.
The following graphs present characteristics of
each of Brazil’s hydrographic regions:

Graphic 3: Surface area (1,000 km2) Graph 5: Population density (people/km2)

Amazon Amazon
Tocantins - Araguaia Tocantins - Araguaia
Western Northeast Western Northeast
Parnaíba Parnaíba
Eastern Northeast Eastern Northeast
São Francisco São Francisco
East Atlantic East Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic Southeast Atlantic
South Atlantic South Atlantic
Uruguay Uruguay
Paraná Paraná
Paraguay Paraguay
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Graphic 4: Population (x 1,000) Graphic 6: Urbanization (%)

Amazon Amazon
Tocantins - Araguaia Tocantins - Araguaia
Western Northeast Western Northeast
Parnaíba Parnaíba
Eastern Northeast Eastern Northeast
São Francisco São Francisco
East Atlantic East Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic Southeast Atlantic
South Atlantic South Atlantic
Uruguay Uruguay
Paraná Paraná
Paraguay Paraguay
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

In terms of surface water availability, the has the lowest average flow levels. The Uruguay
most abundant average flows, almost 132,000 basin is the region with the largest exploitable
m³/s, are to be found in the Amazon region. By renewable groundwater resources: 1.85 liters
contrast, Parnaíba region, with only 753 m³/s per second per km 2.

22
 Executive Summary

Graph 7: Mean flow (m3/s) Graphic 10: Specific water availability4 (l/s/km2)

Amazon Amazon
Tocantins - Araguaia Tocantins - Araguaia
Western Northeast Western Northeast
Parnaíba Parnaíba
Eastern Northeast Eastern Northeast
São Francisco São Francisco
East Atlantic East Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic Southeast Atlantic
South Atlantic South Atlantic
Uruguay Uruguay
Paraná Paraná
Paraguay Paraguay
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 4 8 12 16 20

Graph 8: Specific discharge (l/s/km2) Graph 11: Exploitable renewable groundwater resources (m3/s)

Amazon
Amazon Tocantins - Araguaia
Tocantins - Araguaia Western Northeast
Western Northeast Parnaíba
Parnaíba Eastern Northeast
Eastern Northeast São Francisco
São Francisco East Atlantic
East Atlantic Southeast Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic South Atlantic
South Atlantic Uruguay
Uruguay Paraná
Paraná Paraguay
Paraguay 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
0 10 20 30 40

Graphic 9: Water availability3 (m³/s) Graph 12: Specific exploitable renewable groundwater
resources (l/s/km2)

Amazon Amazon
Tocantins - Araguaia Tocantins - Araguaia
Western Northeast Western Northeast
Parnaíba Parnaíba
Eastern Northeast Eastern Northeast
São Francisco São Francisco
East Atlantic East Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic Southeast Atlantic
South Atlantic South Atlantic
Uruguay Uruguay
Paraná Paraná
Paraguay Paraguay
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

3
Discharge is equaled or exceeded in 95% of the time
4
Discharge is equaled or exceeded in 95% of the time

23
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Multiple use
Total abstractions for all categories of use in Brazil
amount to 1,568 m³ per second, i.e., 3.4% of total
flows with a discharge that is equaled or exceeded
in 95% of the time. This volume is equivalent to 38
olympic swimming pools per minute. Of this total,
roughly 840 m³ per second is effectively consumed,
i.e., not returned to river basins.
The hydrographic region with the highest level of
water consumption (478 m³/s) is the Paraná basin. This
amounts to 30% of all water abstracted in Brazil, and
23% of total consumption. The region facing the most
critical situation is the Eastern Northeast Atlantic, where
abstractions levels exceed water availability, which in turn
amounts to less than 1,200 m3/person/year on average,
owing to the intermittent nature of local water courses.
The highest average per capita water consumption,
including all types of water use, is reported in the Uruguay
hydrographic region, where consumption amounts to
3,353 liters per person per day, whereas the national
average is 799 liters/person/day. The South Atlantic is the
region with the highest abstraction levels by area (1.26
l/s/km2) against a national average of 0.18 l/s/km2.

Graph 13: Total abstractions (m3/s) Graph 15: Total abstractions (% of mean flow)

Amazon Amazon
Tocantins - Araguaia Tocantins - Araguaia
Western Northeast Western Northeast
Parnaíba Parnaíba
Eastern Northeast Eastern Northeast
São Francisco São Francisco
East Atlantic East Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic Southeast Atlantic
South Atlantic South Atlantic
Uruguay Uruguay
Paraná Paraná
Paraguay Paraguay
0 100 200 300 400 500 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Graph 14: Total abstractions (% of water availability)5 Graph 16: Total abstractions by area (l/s/km2)

Amazon Amazon
Tocantins - Araguaia Tocantins - Araguaia
Western Northeast Western Northeast
Parnaíba Parnaíba
Eastern Northeast Eastern Northeast
São Francisco São Francisco
East Atlantic East Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic Southeast Atlantic
South Atlantic South Atlantic
Uruguay Uruguay
Paraná Paraná
Paraguay Paraguay
0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

5
Discharge is equaled or exceeded in 95% of the time

24
 Executive Summary

Graph 17: Total abstractions per person (liters/person/day) supply, which­ accounts for 27% of abstracted flows,
is the second largest category of use; followed by
Amazon industry, which consumes 18%.
Tocantins - Araguaia
When water use distribution is broken down
Western Northeast
Parnaíba by region, the Paraná basin, which has the highest
Eastern Northeast consumption levels, reports the heaviest demand in
São Francisco
East Atlantic
all categories of use except irrigation. The heaviest
Southeast Atlantic consumption levels for irrigation are reported in the
South Atlantic
South Atlantic and Uruguay regions, especially as
Uruguay
Paraná a consequence of the predominance of paddy rice
Paraguay production. In the Southeast Atlantic region, where
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500
Brazil’s largest metropolitan areas are located, the
major categories of use are urban water supply for
human and industrial consumption. The Southeast
When broken down by category of use and type Atlantic and Paraná regions are the only ones in which
of demand, human water supply (urban and rural) the major category of use is water-intensive industry,
amounts to just under 1/3 of total consumption; though irrigation also consumes comparable volumes.
whereas productive activities (irrigation, industrial In the Western Northeast Atlantic region human
use, and livestock) account for the rest. It is hardly consumption is the major category of use, reflecting the
surprising, in the light of the vibrancy of Brazil’s relatively low numbers of water-dependant economic
agribusiness sector (see Pressure and Impacts) that users. The Paraguay region is the only one in which the
irrigation, which consumes 46% of total volumes major category of use is watering livestock, reflecting
abstracted, is the major category of use. Human water the strength of the local stock farming sector.

Pantanal/MS – Photo: Arquivo TDA

25
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Graph 18: Categories of water use by region

100%
2% 3% 2%
5% 5%
7%
12%
11%
17%
90%

27%
29% 23%

24% 80%

11% 46%

33%
70%
5%

60%

47%
26%
64% 60%
16% 71%
29%

33%
8%
39% 50%

2%

8% 22%

6% 3% 86% 40%

7% 2%
7% 9%

4% 3%
30%
2%
4% 4%
10%
50% 46%

40% 12% 20%

3%
33% 28%
30% 32%
1%
25% 25%

18% 10%
14% 3%
1%

15%

0%
Amazon

Tocantins - Araguaia

Western Northeast

Parnaíba

Eastern Northeast

São Francisco

East Atlantic

Southeast Atlantic

South Atlantic

Uruguay

Paraná

Paraguay

Urban human Rural human Industrial Irrigation Livestock

26

The high proportions of urban human consumption
reported reflect high rates of urbanization and water-
supply coverage. Eighty-nine percent of Brazilian homes
are connected to piped water supply and, in the more
urbanized Paraná, São Francisco, Uruguay, and South
Atlantic regions, over 90% of households are connected­
Graph 19: Basic sanitation coverage in urban areas of Brazil’s hydrographic regions
Amazon
Tocantins–Araguaia
Western Northeast
Parnaíba
Eastern Northeast
São Francisco
East Atlantic
Southeast Atlantic
South Atlantic
Uruguay
Paraná
Paraguay
0% 20%
Water Supply
The ready availability of Brazilian water resources,
provided that they are adequately managed, could
prove a significant international competitive advantage.
Despite the overall abundance of water in Brazil, its
geographical distribution and availability to the
population is quite unequal. Though the Amazon region
contains 74% of the nation’s available water resources,
it is home to less than 5% of the Brazilian population.
The balance between supply and consumption is
relatively stable in most regions of the country, except
in semi-arid areas of the Northeast. Water shortages
especially affect the Eastern Northeast Atlantic
hydrographic region, the only one where the water
balance is critical. In some river basins of the Eastern
Northeast Atlantic, water availability amounts to less
than 500 m3/person/year, and is thus considered
critical.6 Aside from this area, certain river basins in the
East Atlantic, Parnaíba, and São Francisco hydrographic
regions suffer from low relative availability. In semi-
arid areas of these regions, where recurrent droughts
6
Under the UN classification, scarcity is defined as flows of less than 1,000 m3/person/yearr
Executive Summary
to piped water supply. Nationwide, the proportion of
households connected to sewage mains (54%) is much
lower, and even in the best served regions (the Paraná
and Southeast Atlantic) coverage levels are under 70%.
In the Paranaíba region, only 4% of households are
connected to sewage collection facilities.
40% 60% 80% 100%
Sewage Collection
exact a heavy toll, water is the most critical factor for
local populations. Small reservoirs for storing water
and regularization of flows on intermittent rivers are
of fundamental and strategic importance for ensuring
adequate supplies for human consumption, watering
livestock, irrigation, and other types of water use.
Productive activities, and especially irrigation,
account for major proportions of the water abstracted.
In the Central-West, for example, abundant supplies
of water for irrigation are among the factors that have
contributed toward transformation of the region into
Brazil’s major area for agricultural expansion. In the
Southeast and South regions, where Brazil’s main
cities and industrial hubs are concentrated, the major
problems relate to the quality of water available, as will
be discussed in the following chapter on Pressure and
Impacts. As in many other countries, such problems
are related to poor basic sanitation, and Brazil is much
closer to achieving universal water supply than it is
meeting its goals with respect to sewage collection.
27
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
II – Pressure and impacts on water
resources in Brazil
With its dynamic and diversified economy, high
rates of urbanization, and strong demand for electric
power, Brazil’s available water resources are subject to
competing pressures from various categories of use. Such
pressures affect present and future demand for water, and
have an impact upon water quality and the sustainability
of environmental conditions. Significant social and
economic changes currently underway in Brazil,
targeted at reducing regional economic disparities, may
result in changes in consumption patterns and could end
up transferring some of these pressures to hitherto less
affected hydrographic regions.
According to the latest (2005) census data, Brazil
has a population of 184.2 million, and a population
density of 22 people per square kilometer. In recent
years, the rate of population growth has declined, as a
consequence of urbanization (84.3% of the population
lives in towns) industrialization, and lower birthrates.
In 2004, Brazil ranked 69th out of 177 countries on
the UNDP’s Human Development Index, with an HDI
rating of 0.788.
The Brazilian population is spread very unevenly
and, historically, the greatest concentrations have
always been in coastal regions, especially of the
Southeast, the formerly forested areas (Zona da
Mata) of the Northeast, and in the South region. The
North and Central-West regions have much lower
populations. A majority of the Brazilian population
lives in towns, and large cities are to be found in the
interior, far from the coastal regions. Indeed, over half
of the Brazil’s population currently lives in towns with
over 100,000 population.
In 2005, Brazil’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
at market prices amounted to R$ 1.9 trillion. Brazil
accounts for three fifths of the industrial production
of South America. It is a member of MERCOSUR (the
Common Market of the South), G-22, and the Cairns
Group on the treatment of farm products. Brazil’s
agribusiness sector accounts for 34% of GDP, 37% of
the nation’s jobs, and 43% of its exports by value.7
Brazil maintains regular trade with some one hundred
countries, and 74% of its exports are manufactured or
7
Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply
28
semi-manufactured goods, reflecting its industrial
prowess advanced technological capabilities.
Concentration of the Brazilian population in the
Southeast reflects the region’s higher incomes and
levels of economic activity. Though the Southeast
comprises only 11% of Brazil’s territory, it is home
to 43% of the population and holds 56% of national
purchasing power. By contrast, the North region
comprises 45% of Brazil’s land area, but is home to
only 8% of the Brazilian population and holds a mere
4.5% of the nation’s purchasing power. In recent years,
these disparities have become less marked, as rates
of GDP growth have been greater in the North and
Northeast regions. It should be remembered, however,
that in terms of the availability of water resources, there
are tremendous contrasts between the North, which
has abundant supplies of surface freshwater, and the
Northeast where, in some areas, water is in critically
short supply. A decentralization of productive activities
is also likely to result in changes in migratory patterns
and to alter current demographic distribution trends.
Even though Brazil’s economic indicators place it
among the ranks of the middle-income countries, unequal
income distribution hampers coverage of sanitation
services among poorer segments of the population,
who end up paying a higher price for drinking water.
According to the UNDP’s 2006 Human Development
Report, the richest 20% of the Brazilian population enjoys
access to water and sanitation services comparable the
rich countries; whereas for the poorest 20% coverage
levels for these two essential services are worse than in
Vietnam. If a correlation is made between coverage of
essential services and social inclusion, future prospects are
favorable, since in recent years there has been a marked
decline in inequality, as a consequence of social programs
launched by the Brazilian Government. However, the
impacts of bringing new contingents of the population
into the consumer economy will unquestionably include
greater demand for water resources, basic sanitation, and
other public services.
Questions relating to water quality, collection and
treatment of urban sewage and industrial effluents,
 Executive Summary

and disposal of wastes from intensive livestock raising Graph 20: BOD5 loads (tonnes of BOD5/day)
and extensive farming, are among the critical issues
that must be faced.
Since few studies have been conducted on Amazon
pollution loads discharged into Brazilian waters, it Tocantins - Araguaia
Western Northeast
is difficult to estimate the true scope of the problem.
Parnaíba
Nonetheless, it is possible to calculate the volumes of Eastern Northeast
household wastes discharged: organic loads originating São Francisco
East Atlantic
from domestic drains are responsible for some 6,392 Southeast Atlantic
tonnes of Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) per day.8 South Atlantic
Uruguay
This volume represents roughly 150 times the organic
Paraná
load generated by domestic drains in a town with a Paraguay
population one million, such as Campinas (SP). When 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

compared with average national flow levels, domestic

pollution amounts to some 0.41 grams of BOD5 per
cubic meter.
Household organic pollution loads vary considerably
from one hydrographic region to another, and the Against this background, GEO Water Resources
highest levels are to be found in the more densely examined a set of typological reports on the problems
populated Paraná and Southeast Atlantic regions. encountered in Brazil:

Photo: Arquivo TDA

8
This implies that, in order to oxidize the organic matter present in sewage, each day there is a need for 6,392 tonnes of oxygen in Brazil’s

29
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
BOX 1: The Amazon basin
The Amazon Basin covers 2/5 of the South American
continent and 5% of the world’s land area. Covering
approximately 6.5 million square kilometers, it comprises
the largest hydrographic region on the planet, through which
flows 1/5 of all the world’s freshwater. Sixty percent of the
Amazon Basin lies within Brazilian territory.
The Amazon basin contains a huge but fragile
wealth of biological diversity, seated on a sedimentary
floodplain. With only a superficial layer of organic matter,
its ecosystem is highly dependent on maintenance of
the forest cover for the reproduction and stability of its
soils. In view of the ‘environmental services’ it provides
for the planet, the Amazon rainforest is of inestimable
importance, especially in its role of recycling humidity
and sequestering carbon dioxide, both of which have
repercussions at the global level.
Water resources in the upper Paraguay river basin
and Pantanal
The Upper Paraguay River Basin encompasses
the largest inland floodplain on the Planet, forming
a vast wetland area in which retained water is
slowly released throughout a long dry season. The
Pantanal biome, with its vast diversity of biological
resources, is regarded as a fragile ecosystem, given
that it is highly dependent upon seasonal rainfall
patterns and the quality of water flowing down
from headwaters on the surrounding plateau. The
luxuriant vegetation and wildlife of the region
make it a prime destination for tourists, however
the economy of the region has traditionally been
based upon beef-cattle raising (over 30 million
head) and extensive farming of grain, both of
which make demands upon the region’s water
resources. Major problems identified relate to the
impact of encroaching farmland on the plateau at
the headwaters of streams that feed the Pantanal;
pollution from household drains and mining
activities; clearing of riparian vegetation, and
compacting of river banks by cattle; and changes
in the qualitative and quantitative dynamics of
water within the Pantanal’s ecosystems. Planned
infrastructure projects, such as the erection of
levees, establishment of iron and steel works, and
dredging and engineering works on the Upper
Paraguay Waterway, all require more intense water
resources management responses in the region.
30
As one of the most humid regions on Earth, the Amazon
basin is of enormous importance to the Planet’s climatic and
hydrological cycles, given its role in evapotranspiration and
the maintaining of rainfall patterns throughout South America
and adjacent regions. The hand of mankind, and especially the
clearing of over 600,000 square kilometers of tropical rainforest
to form cattle pasture and cropland are causing changes in the
climate and hydrology of the Amazon region. Among the changes
reported are accelerated ice melt in the Andes and phenomena
relating to alterations in sea temperatures (notably El Niño and La
Niña). Such changes, reported in 2005, resulted in altered flows
of humid air over the Amazon basin, and led to a severe drought,
with serious consequences for the 167,000 people living in the
State of Amazonas alone. Further studies are needed to assess
future hydrological risks and provide better bases for planning of
water resources management approaches for the region.
Water resources in the cerrado regions of central
Brazil
The Cerrado biome covers vast swathes of the
Brazil’s central highlands. The climate is characterized
by average annual rainfall of around 1,660 mm, with
marked seasonal variations (an intense rainy season,
followed by periods of 4 to 5 months with no rainfall),
and consequently relatively low availability of water
resources. The cerrado region is relatively flat, and is
currently the main area for agricultural expansion in
Brazil, in view of its suitability for extensive mechanized
soybean and corn (maize) production. These crops
make huge demands upon local water resources,
especially during the dry season, and there have been
cases of water-use conflicts when the demands of
farming compete with the requirements of domestic
water supply in towns of the region. Moreover, in
periods of intense rain, agricultural practices have
been blamed for pollution by agricultural chemicals
and silting of streams, aggravated by clearing of
riparian vegetation. There are also problems stemming
from urban pollution, especially in towns located near
the headwaters of rivers. Since the sources of many of
Brazil’s major river systems are in the cerrado region,
such pollution may have effects on populations living
downstream in other regions of the country.
Water resources in semi-arid areas of Brazil
With average annual rainfall of around 900 mm,
and as low as 400 mm in certain localities, the

hydrography of the interior of Brazil’s semi-arid areas
is comprised of intermittent rivers that gradually
become perennial as they approach the coastline.
Prospects for tapping groundwater are remote, and
the storing of water in reservoirs is limited by rates of
evaporation above 2,000 mm per year. The exception
to this low availability of water is the São Francisco
river, whose catchment area encompasses 638,000
square kilometers. The São Francisco river crosses a
huge swath of central and northeastern Brazil, with
flows that reach 1,850 m³/s, thus enabling multiple
use, for such purposes as irrigation and electric-power
generation. Despite adverse climatic conditions, some
48 million Brazilians live in the semi-arid region,
almost 1/3 of them in rural areas. Water scarcity
severely hampers prospects for regional development
in Brazil’s semi-arid areas, and the need to ensure
water supply and basic sanitation for urban and thinly-
spread rural populations poses great challenges.
Water resources along the coastal strip and zona da
mata of northeastern Brazil
One of the initial effects of severe drought in the
interior of Brazil’s Northeast is migration from rural
areas to the large cities of the region. Such migration
is blamed for huge urban environmental problems, as
this population crowds into burgeoning slums (favelas)
that sprout in areas unsuitable for habitation, such as
wetlands, hillsides, floodplains, and along the banks
of rivers and streams. Water quality is compromised by
urban and industrial pollution, and seasonal flooding
is exacerbated by compacting and paving of urban
land. Tourism, one of the most promising economic
alternatives for development in the Northeast, is
jeopardized when water quality at popular vacation
beaches of the region is deemed unfit for bathing.
Water resources in metropolitan conurbations
Though in Brazil’s South and Southeast regions
water resources are fairly abundant and reasonably
well distributed throughout the year, there are
nonetheless problems stemming from the rapidity
of Brazil’s urbanization process. It is estimated that,
over the past 60 years, Brazil’s urban population has
increased by some 110 million; and that half of the
urban population is concentrated in 23 metropolitan
regions. Despite a recent decline in urban growth
rates, such conurbations have a huge impact on water
Executive Summary
resources. Among the main problems that need to
be addressed are household and industrial pollution;
irregular settlement of hillsides, wetlands, floodplains,
and riverbanks; and flooding in medium and large
towns. Compromised sources of water supply, lower
available flows, and deteriorating water quality are
among the consequences of such problems.
Water resources in coastal areas of the south and
southeast
Problems in the coastal zone of the South and
Southeast reflect afore-mentioned weaknesses in
sanitation infrastructure in Brazil’s urban areas.
Since these regions are renowned as leisure and
vacation destinations, their populations are subject
to great seasonal fluctuations during holiday
periods and at weekends when, in some cases, the
population may increase twenty fold. The result of
such seasonality is that sanitation systems alternate
between having idle capacity and being overloaded.
Tourism is jeopardized by problems such as flooding,
inadequate water-supply systems (especially at peak
tourist seasons), deficient sewage collection and
treatment (with malodorous wastes washing up on
beaches), and breakdowns of solid-waste collection
and disposal systems.
Water resources affected by extensive agriculture
and agribusiness
Favorable hydrological and climatic conditions
and fertile soils have endowed the states of the South
and Southeast of Brazil with dynamic, modern, and
diversified agriculture, with abundant production
of grains (soy, maize and wheat), coffee, sugarcane,
cotton, and fruit. The foremost water resources
problems in rural areas of the South and Southeast stem
from overexploitation of all potential farming areas,
and include failure by farmers to respect protective
vegetation on the banks of streams. High levels of
mechanization, intensive use of agricultural chemicals
(pesticides and fertilizers), and successive harvests
without due consideration for such environmental
impacts as topsoil loss (that may be as high as 15
tons per hectare in some cases) and the consequent
silting of streams and pollution of water sources by
agricultural chemicals and untreated animal wastes,
greatly increase the cost of providing supplies of water
for human consumption or industrial use.
31
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
Groundwater management
It has been estimated that Brazil’s exploitable
renewable groundwater resources amount to 4,000
m3/s, and that these are tapped by some 400,000 wells,
to meet the needs of public water supply networks,
irrigation, industry, and leisure. Water supply for
over 15% of Brazilian homes comes exclusively
from groundwater sources. Tapping groundwater
makes it possible to provide safe drinking water for
poor communities located at a distance from public
water mains, particularly in semi-arid rural areas of
the Northeast region. Underlying much of central
and southern Brazil, and extending into Paraguay,
Uruguay, and Argentina is the Guarani Aquifer System,
one of the largest freshwater reserves on the planet. In
recent decades, the quality of groundwater in certain
aquifers has been jeopardized by anthropogenic
activities. To date, few systematic studies on the
regional importance of aquifers and on the chemical
and microbiological quality of groundwater resources
have been carried out.
The general overview provided in this report
shows that vast regional contrasts exist in terms of
water balance, patterns of use, and predominant
32
problems among Brazil’s regions. It is worth
observing, however, that the division of a country
the size of Brazil into large hydrographic regions that
encompass various basins and subbasins, each with
its own specificities and characteristics, does not
imply that all the critical situations, pressures, and
impacts that occur throughout this vast country have
been clearly identified.
Indeed, although this approach provides a useful
spatial overview of hydrological conditions in Brazil,
it is unable to account for all the diverse situations
that occur in each vast geographical area, or to
portray the full scope of water resources management
problems that need to be addressed. To mitigate such
shortcomings, more detailed basin-level assessments
are required, not only of geographic and hydrological
variables, but also of the implications of the various
types of problems identified. Such assessments
encompass environmental, social, and economic
realities, and take into account policy and institutional
factors, all of which need to be addressed from a water
resources management standpoint. The following
chapter on Responses will address these themes.
Photo: Arquivo TDA

Responses adopted by Brazil to water
resources issues
III. 1 – Background
Public sector intervention in the field of water
resources is nothing new in Brazil. Indeed, since the
18th Century, or more precisely 1723 when construction
work began on the imposing Lapa Aqueduct in Rio de
Janeiro, public managers and private entrepreneurs
have vied for projects in the water resources sector.
Burgeoning urban growth and incipient industrialization
in the 19th Century awakened interest in provision of
public water supply, and in the earliest projects for
using water power to generate electricity. Initially, such
projects tended to be managed by private enterprise,
and generally entailed foreign capital investment.
Up until the beginning of the 20th Century, the State’s
role in the water resources sector was negligible, since
it neither provided services nor exercised regulatory or
inspection activities. However, in the 1920s, popular
dissatisfaction with the quality of services provided
led to the State’s assuming control of a number of
water supply and sanitation services.
The first steps toward establishing a legal
framework for the water resources sector in Brazil took
Aqueduto da Lapa - RJ – Photo: Riotur
Executive Summary
place with the framing of the Federal Constitution of
1934, when the Water Code (Código de Águas) was
approved. The Water Code established the role of the
public authorities in controlling and stimulating the
use of water. It established principles for institutional
control, management instruments, and regulation,
with the aim of ensuring availability of water for
multiple uses. Though it dedicated an entire article
to guaranteeing adequate water supply to fulfill ‘the
primary necessities of life, it also adopted a sectoral
approach by devoting 65 articles on the use of water
by the incipient electric power generation industry.
The 1940s witnessed the inauguration of the
first State funded sanitation services, and the first
experiences of integrated multiple use of water for
electric power, navigation, and irrigation. The sectoral
focus remained strong, and was the inspiration for
specific sets of policies for each area.
Electric Power Generation
The creation of the Ministry of Mines and Energy,
in 1960, marked the development of Brazil’s State
electric power sector. In 1968, the National Water
and Electric Energy Department (DNAEE) was created,
as the successor to the Water Service of the National
Mineral Production Department (DNPM), and to
the National Water and Electric Power Council. The
DNAEE held responsibility for management of water
and electric power services at the federal level, until
it was abolished in 1997, to make way for the new
National Electric Energy Agency (ANEEL).
The earliest environmental concerns found
expression in the Forestry Code (Law 4.771, of 1965)
which created areas of permanent preservation and,
indirectly, afforded protection for flow levels and
water quality by ordaining the protection of riparian
forests, and the banks of rivers, streams, springs, lakes,
lagoons and reservoirs. Thus both environmental and
economic approaches were brought to bear, and a
balance was sought between them.
The 1967 Constitution assigned two roles to the
Federal Government: on the one hand it acted as the
conceding power and regulator; on the other it was
33
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

the main investor and developer, and thus subject
to its own regulations. Brazil’s electric power sector
expanded under state-owned companies up until
the mid 1990s. Brazil’s largest hydroelectric power
station, the huge Itaipu Plant, a bi-national project on
the border between Brazil and Paraguay, typifies the
grandiose plans brought into effect under this state-
sponsored model. Within the space of a few decades
Brazil developed the vast and complex electricity
production, transmission, and distribution system,
based on hydroelectric plants, that remain the central
elements of Brazil’s energy mix to this day.

Table 1: Types of electric power generation in Brazil

Installed potential

Installed Capacity
Type %
Plants (kW)

Hydroelectric 625 73,361,927 70.28

Gas 102 10,851,916 10.40

Oil 570 4,680,510 4.48

Biomass 270 3,709,785 3.55

Nuclear 2 2,007,000 1.92

Coal 7 1,415,000 1.36

Wind 14 186,850 0.18

Imports 8,170,000 7.83

Total 1,590 104,382,988 100

Source: www.aneel.gov.br - updated November 9, 2006.

Usina hidrelétrica de Itaipú – Photo: Arquivo TDA

34

The predominance of water-powered electricity
generation plants has brought incalculable benefits
that go far beyond the scope of the electricity sector,
including training of high-quality human resources,
production of scientific and technological knowledge
(especially systematization of hydrological data and
information on Brazil’s principal river basins), and
regularization of downstream flow levels on large rivers
as a consequence of management of hydroelectric
reservoirs.
Sanitation
In the sanitation sector, it was estimated, in 1967,
that 45% of Brazil’s urban population was connected
to water-supply systems, whereas only 24% had access
to sewage mains. In 1970, the Brazilian Government
launched the National Sanitation Plan (PLANASA)
with the aim of promoting significant improvements
in the provision of sanitation services.
The Plan earmarked resources for the sanitation
sector and strengthened the state-level sanitation
companies. These state-level companies thus began
to encroach upon the activities of municipal bodies
that had previously subcontracted water-supply and
sanitation services on a concession basis. This was
the onset of disputes over the right to provide such
services that persist to the present day.
Among the achievements of PLANASA were:
the establishment of integrated systems in certain
metropolitan areas; planned exploitation of water at the
regional level, with better quality control; instituting of
charges for services based upon standardized criteria;
and the development of technologies to reduce losses.
Despite the advances brought in under the Plan and
increased coverage levels (89% of households are now
connected to water supply and 54% to sewage mains),
environmental liabilities relating to uncollected and
untreated sewerage remain a serious problem in
Brazil. With the exhaustion of PLANASA’s investment
capacity in the late 1980s, Brazil lacked an institutional
and financial framework for the sanitation sector, until
January 2007, when Federal Law 11.445 was approved,
with the aim of reinvigorating the sanitation sector.
The new law provides for: basic sanitation services;
forms of regulation and regionalized provision of
services; planning requirements; technical, economic,
and social aspects; and establishes mechanisms for
social control. Under such conditions and incentives,
Executive Summary
it is likely that there will be more private investment,
especially as a consequence of better regulations for
the sector and guarantees for concession contracts,
supported by adequate technical, economic, and
financial feasibility studies.
Irrigation
In 1979 the National Irrigation Policy (Law
6.662) was approved to serve as a framework for the
National Irrigation Program and the Irrigation Program
for the Northeast. Initiatives, both on the part of the
government and of the private sector, led to a doubling
of the area under irrigation in the 1960s, and a further
doubling in the 1980s, by which time 1,600,000 ha
were dedicated to irrigated farming. This is still a
relatively modest area in relation to the vast potential
available.
At first there was little coordination or logistical
planning for transport of inputs and crops, and not
much in the way of technical assistance or marketing
policies. Only later, with private sector participation
in the production of crops for the domestic and
export markets, did the agribusiness sector undergo
significant expansion.
Inland waterways
Although inland navigation offers one of the cheapest
means of transporting goods, the inland navigation sector
in Brazil has remained relatively underdeveloped, owing
to certain unfavorable topographical and geographic
factors, and competition from the network of highways
that underwent significant growth during much of the
20th Century. Moreover, poor articulation among different
sectors has hampered development, and the building
of hydroelectric dams, without provision of locks, has
created serious obstacles to navigation.
Subsequent engineering works have sought to
rectify such lack of forethought, but work on the
Tietê-Paraná waterway, started in the 1970s, was only
concluded in the 1990s. In the 1990s the Taquari-
Jacuí waterway in Rio Grande do Sul accounted for
a major portion of the freight transported by inland
waterways in Brazil.
River basin management
During the course of the 20th Century, the Brazilian
federal administration experimented a variety of
water resources management models - ranging
35
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
from centralized to decentralized, state and private
ownership, allowing or forbidding foreign investment
- depending upon contemporary political trends. What
has become clear from all these experiences is the need
for institutional and inter-sectoral coordination among
Federal, State and Municipal authorities, so as to
minimize institutional and legal obstacles, and ensure
sources of funding for the water resources sector.
In 1978 the first attempt was made to overcome
difficulties imposed by the traditional sector-based
approach, through the adoption of river basins as the
basic unit for management, and the establishment of the
Executive Committee for Integrated River Basin Studies
(CEEIBH), comprised of representatives of the Ministry
of Mines and Energy and the Ministry of the Interior.
More than ten basin committees were established
for rivers under federal jurisdiction, responsible for
“classification of federal rivers, conducting integrated
water use studies, and monitoring rational water use
in river basins under federal jurisdiction, multiple
water use, and mitigation of practices that damage the
ecology of the region”.
Although this was an innovative approach, these basin
committees were comprised entirely of governmental
technical specialists, and lacked participation of the
municipalities and of organized civil society. Moreover,
the committees lacked a legal framework and sources of
funding and, as a consequence, only the São Francisco
River Basin Committee (CEEIVASF) managed to survive.
Nonetheless, this initiative demonstrated the merit of
focusing upon river basins as the essential planning and
management unit, an approach adopted by subsequent
efforts.
In the 1980s, efforts to protect the environment and
discipline productive activities that have an impact on
natural resources also adopted river basins as the principal
territorial focus. In 1981, the National Environment
Policy (Law 6.938) created the National Environment
System (SISNAMA) and set standards for sustainable
development. Among the instruments instituted under
this Policy were Environmental Impact Studies (EIA) and
Environmental Impact Reports (RIMA).
This new legislation also provided for the creation
of new federal and state environmental management
bodies, responsible for licensing and inspecting
potentially polluting productive activities, and for
identifying areas of special environmental interest.
Management instruments for the environmental sector
36
adopted a “Command and Control” approach, and are
based upon the capacity of the State to set emissions
limits and monitor compliance.
Thus water resources use became subject to
increasingly stringent controls: in 1986, for example,
the National Environment Council (CONAMA)
required that environmental impact studies be carried
out prior to installation of new hydroelectric plants,
and established a detailed set of classifications for
fresh, salt, and brackish waters. It also set limits for
discharges of substances into water bodies, and
determined water quality criteria.
Thus, Brazil can look back on the following
achievements:
• Expansion of treated water supply systems (though
water supply networks have failed to reach some
of the poorest areas, and sewage collection and
treatment systems have not expanded sufficiently,
owing to lack of investment);
• The hydroelectric sector has successfully accompanied
expanding urban and industrial demand;
• A reasonable expansion of areas under irrigation,
especially in the semi-arid Northeast;
• Reduced industrial pollution, as a consequence
of more stringent environmental licensing and
inspection requirements.
On the other hand, the limitations of current
management instruments and of the capacity of
individual sectors to promote further progress were
becoming evident. Certain of the main water resources
problems required new planning and management
paradigms, especially the quest for sustainability
through integrated approaches and multidisciplinary
solutions.
III. 2 – Paradigm change - SINGREH
Promulgation of the new Federal Constitution
by the National Congress, in 1988, marked the
culmination of the redemocratization movement in
Brazil, and led to a redistribution of powers among
the Federal Union, the States, and the Municipalities.
Decentralization, and the role of the private sector
in promoting development, were among the issues
addressed by the new Constitution.
Principles and guidelines laid down in the
Constitution had strong repercussions on water

resources and environmental management, the
latter being the subject of a specific chapter of the
constitutional text, which states that “All have the right
to an ecologically balanced environment, which is an
asset of common use and essential to healthy quality
of life, and both the Government and the community
shall have the duty to defend and preserve it for
present and future generations”.
Though the 1988 Constitution does not have a
specific chapter on water, various articles imply
a more economic approach to water resources
management. Among the changes introduced under
the 1988 Constitution are:
• An alteration in jurisdiction over water, placing it
under jurisdiction of the Federal Union and the
States, thus removing it from Municipal control;
• Abolition of private jurisdiction of water, that had
hitherto been accepted under the Water Code. All
water is under public jurisdiction;
• It is the competence of the Federal Union to
legislate on water and electric power, and to
establish a national water resources management
system.
Based on principles and obligations established by the
1988 Constitution, Law 9.433/97 of 1997 introduced the
National Water Resources Policy and created the National
Water Resources Management System (SINGREH).
Law 9.433/97 is aligned with concepts derived
from international conferences on the environment and
water resources, such as the Mar Del Plata Conference
and the third edition of the World Water Forum.
Executive Summary
The Law established the following fundamental
premises: (i) water as a public good; (ii) water as a limited
resource, with economic value; (iii) priority for human
consumption and watering livestock; (iv) multiple use of
water; (v) river basins as the planning and management unit;
and (vi) decentralized and participative management.
The objectives set forth in the Law are: (i) to ensure
necessary availability of water for current and future
generations, with adequate quality standards; (ii) to
promote rational and integrated use of water resources;
and (iii) to prevent critical hydrological events.
The general guidelines foreseen in the law include:
(i) systematic management of quantities and quality;
(ii) adaptation to (physical, biotic, economic, social
and cultural) regional diversity; (iii) integration with
environmental management; (iv) articulation with
regional and land-use planning; and (v) integration
with estuarine and coastal zone systems.
To put these principles into effect and ensure
decentralization and social participation, SINGREH
is provided with a set of decision-making bodies,
comprised of a higher deliberative board made up
of the National Water Resources Council and its
corresponding state-level bodies, the State Water
Resources Councils; regional deliberative boards to
be installed at planning and management units, i.e.,
Federal River Basin Committees and State River Basin
Committees; and executive regional decision-making
bodies, Water Agencies at the federal and state levels.
There follows a diagram showing how agencies at
various levels combine to form the National Water
Resources Management System:
Canal de Irrigação/PB – Photo: Arquivo TDA
37
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Figure 1: General Structure of SINGREH

National Water
Resources Council - CNRH
Minstry of Environment
Secretariat of Water
Resources - SRH
Federal Level
Federal framework in accordance
with Federal Law 9.433/97 and
Law 9.984/00 that created ANA;
the SRH is responsible for
formulation of policies to be
approved by the CNRH and its
executive secretariat; ANA is an
operational entity of the system
National Water responsible for its implementation
Agency - ANA

Federal River Federal Level Shared with

Basin Committees
Water Agencies
the States
River Basin Framework, in
accordance with Federal Law
9.433/97

State Water
Resources State Levels
Councils - CERH
State level frameworks that vary
from one state to another, in
accordance with their respective
State Secretariat with power over Water Resources laws; an Independent Body or
State Company for Water
Resources is the model generally
found in states of the Northeast
State Water State Water Region. Other states may also
Resources Management Resources Management adopt this model, with an
Body Company or Agency operational body responsible for
implementation, similar to ANA
at the federal level.

States Rivers
Basin Committees Water Agencies

National water resources council (CNRH)

Inaugurated in 1998, the CNRH is the policy
formulation body of SINGREH. It is responsible for
issuing resolutions for the purpose of implementing
the National Policy and for deployment of its
management instruments, as foreseen in law. Presided
over by the Minister of Environment, membership
Council consists of 57 representatives, nominated for
three-year terms, of which:
• 29 are representatives of the Federal Government;
• 10 are representatives of the states (State Councils);
• 12 are representatives of water-user sectors; and
• 6 are representatives of civil-society organizations.
The CNRH has the following competences: (i) to
provide general guidelines and policies that govern
the System; (ii) to approve the establishment of basin
committees; (iii) to arbitrate in cases of disputes
between basin committees and State Water Resources
Councils; (iv) to approve and monitor execution of the
National Water Resources Plan; and (v) to approve
general criteria for the granting of licenses for the use
of water and water use charges.
To assist members of the Council in their decision
making, the CNRH has ten Technical Chambers,
comprised of between seven and seventeen members

38

that serve two-year terms. These chambers are
generally made up of members of the council, and
meet on average once a month.
Basin committees
Basin Committees are regional deliberative bodies,
representing the planning and management units (i.e.,
the river basins), and serve as forums for the discussion
of issues of interest to various user segments relating
to the use and protection of local water resources. The
number of serving members of these Committees may
vary, but the proportion of representatives from each
sector should be as follows:
• Up to 40% representatives of the Public Authorities;
• Up to 40% representatives of water user sectors;
• At least 20% representatives of civil society.
The basic competences of the Committee are: (i) to
arbitrate in disputes over the use of water resources;
(ii) to approve and monitor execution of the Water
Resources Plan for the river basin; (iii) to propose to the
National and State Councils what levels of insignificant
use should be exempted from compulsory water
use licensing; and (iv) to propose rates and establish
mechanisms for deploying water use charges.
The national water agency (ANA)
Created by Law 9.984 of 2000, the National Water
Agency (ANA) is an autonomous executive and regulatory
agency, with a special independent management and
financial structure, whose officers enjoy administrative
decision-making independence and, as a body of the
State, are not beholden to any specific Administration.
ANA was founded to complement the National
Water Resources Policy, as an institutional response
to the complexity and difficulties inherent to
implementation of the SINGREH which, despite its
strong legal framework, had not initially produced
the effects expected by Brazilian society and the main
stakeholders involved. With the founding of ANA, the
Basin Committees have taken on greater dynamism
needed to deploy a series of management instruments
made available under the new water resources policy.
ANA’s basic competencies are: (i) the issuing of licenses
for the use of water resources; (ii) inspection of water
use and water resources users; and (iii) deployment
of water use charges, through delegation to Water
Agencies and Basin Agencies.
Executive Summary
Water agencies and basin agencies
These are the executive bodies responsible for
implementation of decisions of their respective Basin
Committees. They may vary in structure, and among
the institutional alternatives currently in effect are:
• Public-private joint capital companies (the model
adopted in the State of Ceará);
• Independent regional public body (State of Rio
Grande do Sul);
• Foundation under private law (State of São Paulo);
Or they may be structured as an:
• Independent social organization (OS), private
civil law entities that have greater managerial and
operational flexibility;
• Civil society organization in the public interest
(OSCIP), entities of private law, accredited by the
public sector to provide non-exclusive services.
Their basic competencies include: (i) acting as
executive secretariats for their respective committees;
(ii) maintaining a register of water users and an updated
balance of available water; (iii) deployment of water
use charges, by delegation of the licensing authority;
(iv) drafting of Water Resources Plans, for approval by
the respective basin committee; (v) conducting studies
and analyses of plans, projects, and engineering works
financed by water use charges.
Management instruments
Aside from providing an institutional structure, the
National Water Resources Policy establishes a set of
five essential management instruments, designed to
endow agencies of the system with effective means of
achieving the desired goals. These are:
• Water resources plans, prepared at three levels – the
National Plan, State Plans, and Basin Plans;
• Classification of water bodies, according to their
main category of use, with water-quality standards
to be attained when deploying basin plans;
• Licensing of the right to use water, with State
regulations for water use, in line with goals set
through public participation in the drafting of
plans, and in line with their respective category
of use classification;
• Deployment of water use charges, denoting that
water is an economic good and that availability is
conditioned to a publicly determined price; and
39
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
• Establishment of a water resources information
system, containing comprehensive information on
water availability, demand (registers of water users),
and decision-making support systems.
Water resources plans
These master plans aim to institute and guide
implementation of water resources management
policies. They contain long-term objectives, with
planning horizons compatible with the periods
foreseen for deployment of their programs and
projects. Moreover, they contain diagnostic situation
analyses, evaluations of land use and of the conduct
of economic activities, balances of current water
availability and future demand for water resources,
priorities and guidelines for licensing, and provisions
for deployment of water use charges.
The Secretariat for Water Resources of the Ministry
of Environment is responsible for coordination and
preparation of the National Water Resources Plan,
whereas ANA is responsible for its implantation,
monitoring, and evaluation. The drafting of state water
resources plans is the responsibility of the state-level
40
secretariats that manage water resources, whereas the
State Water Resources Councils are responsible for
approving such plans. At the river basin level, water
resources plans are prepared by the respective Water
Agencies, and subject to appreciation and approval of
their respective Basin Committees.
The National Water Resources Plan (PNRH)
currently in effect was approved by the National
Water Resources Council on January 30, 2006,
after a participatory planning process carried out
in conjunction with the state level water resources
management systems. The conceptual bases for
this plan were guided by the premises, objectives,
and guidelines foreseen in Law 9.433/97. The
PNRH proposed the division of the country into 12
Hydrographic Regions and 56 planning units, so as
better to fulfill its three main objectives, namely:
improve water availability; reduce the incidence of
water use conflicts; and promote public awareness
of the need to conserve water, in view of its socio-
environmental value. The Plan also drew up scenarios
for national water resources up to the year 2020, using
a prospective exploratory analysis methodology.
Pantanal/MS – Photo: Arquivo TDA
 Executive Summary

Figure 2: Breakdown of PNRH information. (A) Brazil, (B) national hydrographic division and (C) 56 planning units.

Amazon
AmazonHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region Paraguay
ParaguayHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region
East
EastAtlantic
AtlanticHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region Paraná
ParanáHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region
Western
WesternNortheast
NortheastAtlantic
AtlanticHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region Parnaíba
ParnaíbaHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region
Eastern
EasternNortheast
NortheastAtlantic
AtlanticHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region São
SãoFrancisco
FranciscoHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region
Southeast
SoutheastAtlantic
AtlanticHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region Tocantins
TocantinsAraguaia
AraguaiaHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region
South
SouthAtlantic
AtlanticHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region Uruguay
UruguayHydrographic
HydrographicRegion
Region

Source: SRH (2006)

Eight of Brazil’s 27 states have now concluded
preparation of their State Water Resources Plans,
and an additional five are nearing completion. At
the basin level, 75 water resources planning studies
have been conducted for rivers under federal and state
jurisdiction, 65 of which have now been concluded.
Most of these basin plans were concluded prior to
the establishment of Basin Committees, and thus
were not duly monitored and validated by regional
stakeholders, as required by Law 9.433/97.
Classification of water bodies
Classification of water bodies according to
categories of use, regarded as an essential stage for
strategic planning at the basin level, has been a common
practice in Brazil since the 1980s. Such classification
aims to set quality goals to be attained within a given
period, by means of implementation of basin plans.
The rational for such classification is the need
to ensure water quality compatible with the most
demanding categories of use and reduce the cost of
combating pollution by deployment of preventative
measures. Classification must be carried out in
accordance with water resources plans and approved
by the National Water Resources Council (CONAMA)
or the respective State Council, in response to a
request submitted by the River Basin Agency to the
respective Committee.
A CONAMA resolution sets eleven main classes
of use for water resources: five for freshwater, three
for brackish water, and three for salt water. These
categories range from “human water supply” to
“aquaculture and fisheries” and “navigation”.
Licensing of the right to use water resources
Licensing is an administrative procedure whereby
a competent authority grants the licensee the right to
use water resources, for final consumption or as an
input for a production process, for a given period, and
in accordance with specified conditions. Licenses are
issued by the Federal authorities with the aim of ensuring
quantitative and qualitative control of water use, and
promoting the effective exercise of rights of access to
such resources. To safeguard the principle of multiple
uses, licensing of the right to use water resources must
abide by priorities established in water resources plans,
and must respect classification criteria.
ANA holds responsibility for the issuing of
licenses to use water under federal jurisdiction, but
it may delegate such power to the States and Federal
District. Studies conducted by ANA indicate that,
by December 2004, over 95,000 licenses had been
issued throughout Brazil, most of them for human
water supply; and that the largest licensed flows are
for irrigated farming, which accounts for 60% of
licensed abstractions.

41
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Graph 21: Licensed flows, by category of use

Licensed flows by category of use (m³/s) 1.200

1.000

800

600

400

200

0
Water supply

Livestock

Irrigation

Industry

Aquaculture

Recreational

Other

Not informed

Discharge
Source: ANA (2005)

Water use charges

Though water use charges had been foreseen in Janeiro, and São Paulo. At the federal level, charges
the Water Code of 1934, they were only deployed as a for the use of water under federal jurisdiction were
management instrument after enactment of Law 9.433/97. instituted in the Paraíba do Sul river basin, in Brazil’s
The aim of such charges is to consolidate the concept of Southeast region, in March 2003. A second experience
water as an economic good, and to make water users currently underway in the State of São Paulo entails
aware of its real value, as a function of the quantities and deployment of water use charges in the Piracicaba,
quality required for a given form of use. Charges serve Capivari and Jundiaí (PCJ) basins.
as an incentive for rational water use; provide funding
for studies, programs, projects and engineering works Water resources information system
foreseen in water resources plans; and help defray the The Water Resources Information System is an
implantation and administrative costs incurred by agencies instrument for collection, treatment, storage, and
that comprise the National Water Resources Management retrieval of information on water resources and
System. The Law foresees that charges should always be factors that have a bearing on their management.
associated with licensing, and that funding generated by Such consolidated information enables identification
water use charges should preferentially be invested in the of seasonal, regional, and annual variations in water
river basin where it was collected. availability; gaps and deficiencies that affect prospects
ANA is entitled to set charges for the use of water for effective and efficient management; potential
under federal jurisdiction, whereas state level water conflicts among the multiple forms of water use;
resources management bodies set charges for water and enables contingency planning for critical events
under state jurisdiction, though collection may be (floods, drought, and degradation of water quality).
delegated to a Basin Agency or similar body, by means The System aims to provide inputs for decision making
of a Management Contract. on the part of communities, water users, and public
In view of the complexity of instituting water use authorities, through decentralized production of data
charges, this form of management instrument has so and information, unified coordination, and guaranteed
far been deployed only in the States of Ceará, Rio de public access to data.

42

For many decades the Hydrological Information
System (SIH), operated by the now-defunct National
Water and Electric Energy Department (DNAEE),
gathered information for use in hydrological studies.
In 2000, the SIH was absorbed by the National
Water Resources Information System (SNIRH) which
now serves as a unified platform for water resources
data used by a variety of public bodies. Today, all
hydrological information, including SHI’s historical
time series, are stored on the SNIRH, and can be
accessed by the general public through ANA’s
HIDRO database.
Executive Summary
The National Water Resources Information System
(SNIRH) is organized in a participatory and decentralized
manner, and comprises six inter-related modules: a Water
Typology Module; a Qualitative and Quantitative Data
Module; a Water Availability and Hydraulic Operations
Module; a Water Use Regulation Module; a Planning and
Management Module; and a Documentation Module.
Apart from unifying the various databases, the new System
enables transmission of information, control of processes,
sharing of data, and integration with state-level systems
and, especially, the National Register of Water Resources
Users (CNARH) that is gradually being implanted.
Photo: Arquivo ANA
43
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
Box 2: National hydrometeorological network
Brazil’s first hydrological surveys were conducted over a
century ago, when the first systematic pluviometric stations
were installed to take regular measurements. In the early 20th
Century the first river depth and flow measurement stations
were set up, with the aim of assessing hydroelectric potential.
Currently, the National Hydrometeorological Network
comprises 23,910 measurement points, cataloged on
ANA’s HIDRO database. Of this total, 14,169 are active
measuring stations, operated by a variety of public and
private institutions.
Management instruments in the states
With the exception of the State of Roraima, the
other 25 Brazilian states and the Federal District have
now enacted legislation relating to their water resources
management systems. Some of these laws were
approved prior to enactment of Federal Law 9.433/97.
Thus, a “second generation” of state laws has since
been approved, to bring the states into alignment with
the new federal legislation, and the majority of states
now have laws that reflect the spirit of Law 9.433/97.
44
ANA itself maintains 4,341 measurement stations,
of which 1,806 take fluviometric measurements (1,286
to assess water quality, and 456 to collect sediments) and
2,535 that take pluviometric measurements. Hydrological
measurements may be taken at pluviometric stations and
conventional fluviometric stations by onsite observers, or by
telemetrics using automatic sensors.
The data generated is available on the HIDRO database,
which is a component of the National Water Resources
Information System.
State-level water resources policies and legislation
provide for decision-making bodies and a variety of
management instruments, similar to those foreseen
at the federal level. In many cases, however, these
measures have not yet been deployed, principally
because they require enabling legislation. A survey of
the options available in each state reveals that water
resources managers have a variety of alternatives at
their disposal:
São Paulo/SP – Photo: Arquivo TDA
 Executive Summary

Table 3: State level water resources management instruments

Instruments
Region/State
PERH PRH Class. Lic. Pen. WUC. C.S. CM Comp. Fund SIRH
South Region
Rio Grande do Sul D L
Santa Catarina D D
Paraná D D
Southeast Region
São Paulo L D D L/D D
Rio de Janeiro P L D
Espírito Santo
Minas Gerais D D D P D D D D D D
Central - West Region
Mato Grosso
Mato Grosso do Sul
Goiás R
Distrito Federal D D
Northeast Region
Bahia D D
Sergipe D D
Alagoas D
Pernambuco L P
Paraíba D D
Rio Grande do
L D D
Norte
Ceará D D D
Piauí D
Maranhão
North Region
Pará
Amazonas
Tocantins P
Amapá
Roraima P D D
Acre L
PERH – State Water Resources Plan
PRH – Water Resources Plan – basin level
Class. – Classification of water bodies, according to the main category of use.
Pen. – Penalties
WUC – Water use charges
C.S. – Cost sharing for multiple use works.
CM – Compensation for Municipalities
Comp. – Other forms of Compensation.
Fund – State Water Resources Fund, for investment in the same river basin.
P – Order
D – Decree
R – Resolution
L – Law

= absence of an instrument in the law

= presence of an instrument in the law
= under implantation

45
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
Advances in water resources management in Brazil
The National Water Resources Policy replaces
the ad hoc management system in effect until 1997,
with an advanced model based on the principles
of decentralization and integrated water resources
management. These underlying principles result in an
institutional arrangement embodied by the National
Water Resources Management System (SINGREH)
and a set of synergistic instruments, the application of
which aims to induce harmonious social participation,
alongside actions that are the exclusive prerogative of the
public authorities, such as licensing and inspection.
The SINGREH brings a new focus to water
resources issues, by opening up opportunities for
public participation in decision making, in the form of
Basin Committees and other deliberative bodies. The
new paradigm enables better governance by enhancing
the performance of the State, while promoting greater
social participation, thus imbuing decisions with
greater transparency. It promotes a sharing of social
responsibilities and closer integration and cooperation
in relations between the three levels of government
and civil society, aside from providing support for
deployment of new management instruments based
upon economic incentives.
SINGREH was designed to operate in an integrated
manner, and its Information System gathers, compiles,
and systemizes information and data for use in the
decision-making processes that underpin integrated
water resources management. For strategic policy and
planning purposes, the System uses water resources
46
plans that range from the national to the basin level,
and the classification of water bodies. These instruments
were drafted and approved by the boards of the basin
committees, and are the bases of negotiated water-
use pacts that govern priority actions and investments.
Licensing and water use charges, on the other hand, are
the responsibility of the public authorities, and should
be oriented by these planning instruments and data
available from the Information System.
Policy instruments are closely related to the
entities that comprise SINGREH: their guidelines and
criteria must be analyzed, debated, and approved
by the boards of the System, and implemented by
executive bodies such as the National Water Agency,
the competent state bodies and basin agencies, all of
which must implement decisions approved by their
respective committees.
Apart from its intrinsic merits, the model is being
implemented within a favorable context, in which:
• specific legal and normative mechanisms exist;
• an administrative infrastructure has been installed;
• qualified human resources are available;
• good technological capabilities are present
(especially in the IT area); and
• technical-strategic and operational-planning
competencies exist.
In the decade since enactment of Law 9.433/97
and the establishment of SINGREH, advances have
been achieved with regard to various aspects of
implementation of the System:

• 22 State Water Resources Councils have now
been founded in the 27 Brazilian states, and an
additional four Councils are in the process of
formation;
• 140 federal and state basin committees have
been created and are in activity;
• 2 committees, with their respective Water
Agencies and management instruments, including
water use charges have been instituted;
• The National Water Resources Plan was
recently launched to guide implementation of
the National Water Resources Policy;
• The National Water Agency (ANA) has introduced
order to water resources management at the
Federal level;
• The Program for Sustainable Development of
Water Resources in the Semi-Arid region (ProÁgua
Semi-árido) has enabled qualitative improvements
in water resources management in the Northeast.
From the standpoint of river basin management,
the main focus of attention and new experiences has
been the Paraíba do Sul river, in Brazil’s Southeast
region. This is an area of considerable importance,
in view of its location in the proximity of two major
metropolitan regions (São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro)
and because the basin encompasses one of the
most economically productive parts of the country,
accounting for some 12% of GDP. The Paraíba do Sul
Basin was the first to institute water use charges, in
2003, in compliance with concepts and provisions
of Law 9.433/97. It was also the first basin to enter
into a management contract with ANA, in 2004, after
having secured approval from its basin committee (the
Paraíba do Sul River Basin Integration Committee -
CEIVAP) for the founding of the Pro-Water Resources
Management Association of the Paraíba do Sul River
Basin (AGEVAP), the ‘delegated entity’ empowered to
perform functions inherent to a basin agency.
Another example that merits mention is the
Piracicaba, Capivari and Jundiaí (PCJ) river basins
complex, in the State of São Paulo, where an
association of municipalities, concession holders,
public and private companies, and water resources
users established the PCJ Inter-municipal Consortium
to serve as a “delegated entity”. The Consortium, having
secured approval from the respective committee,
signed a management contract with ANA. Initial
Executive Summary
16a Reunião Ordinária do Comitê do PCJ – Foto: Arquivo PCJ
compliance with water use charges from bodies under
federal jurisdiction in these basins has been 97%.
At the state level, the States of São Paulo, Rio de
Janeiro, Minas Gerais, and Ceará all now have legal
frameworks that enable them to institute charges for the
use of water from rivers under their jurisdiction. Indeed,
Brazil is among the few countries that effectively
apply water use charges and have functioning basin
committees and regional boards that deliberate on
water resources issues. In brief, few countries in Latin
America can match the progress achieved by Brazil in
the field of water resources management.
The challenge of deploying management instruments
Although conceptually SINGREH has now generally
been accepted, considerable scope for improvement
remains, especially in terms of implementation.
Specific weaknesses are most evident at the state
level, where water resources management bodies are
still incipient and have experienced difficulties in the
deployment of management instruments. At the federal
level, also, obstacles of a structural and circumstantial
nature to full implementation of the System still need
to be surmounted. There is, moreover, scope for
discussion as to whether the institutional strategies
adopted are fully adequate.
Weaknesses of the system
Though the water resources management system is
national in scope, its performance depends to a great
extent upon deployment of management instruments
at the state level. In some states, deployment of such
instruments has hardly begun.
47
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
To identify specific flaws in state-level water
resources management and establish a base line
on the current status of integrated water resources
management in Brazil, an evaluation study carried out
within the context of the National ProÁgua Program
identified 30 variables, involving institutional and
legal aspects, and problems relating to deployment of
management instruments.
The results of this evaluation reveal that no
Brazilian state has complied with all the necessary
conditions for full implementation of SINGREH.
Of Brazil’s 27 States, only fifteen fulfill over half of
the System’s requirements. This reflects very uneven
levels of implementation of management bodies and
of deployment of management instruments.
Among the flaws in state-level water resources
management identified by the evaluation were:
• Limitations relating to:
- staffing levels, with poor qualification, training,
wages, job security, and renewal;
- operation of pluviometric, fluviometric and
water quality networks; and,
- technical and managerial instruments, including
gaps in the cartographic base, registers of water
users, decision making support systems, etc.;
• Weaknesses of the councils and committees,
that often lack a quorum, and whose agendas
often neglect issues of importance to the main
stakeholders;
• Planning instruments (state plans, basin plans, and
strategic plans) drafted on the basis of extensive
diagnostic studies, but lacking in concrete proposals
for intervention;
48
• Funding for management systems, owing to scarcities
of local revenue sources and over dependence of
state governments upon federal funding allocations;
• Lack of evaluation mechanisms to appraise
management systems and stimulate adjustments
and corrections necessary for further progress.
Structural obstacles
Aside from the aforementioned specific
weaknesses, there are structural problems that also
hamper implementation of SINGREH, both at the
federal and state levels. There is a need for strategy
adjustments to overcome such institutional problems,
many of which relate to the legal and administrative
structure of the Brazilian State. There follows a brief
assessment of the main such obstacles:
1. Mismatches between national water resources
legislation and the legal framework of the Brazilian
State – ten years after enactment of Federal Law
9.433/97, there remains a significant gap between its
principles and their effective application in practical
terms. Water use charges, for example, are defined
as a “public price”, for lack of a better legal term. As
a consequence, the proceeds of such charges were
initially regarded as budgetary revenue, and thus
subject to spending cuts and controls - a concept
totally at odds with the principles of decentralized
economic management. Another consequence was
the inability of basin agencies to institute charges, as
the law had initially foreseen. Charges can now only
be collected by publicly licensed entities (ANA and its
corresponding state bodies). The problem was partially
resolved when a change in the Budget Guidelines
Law (LDO) reclassified the proceeds from water use
charges. Nonetheless, there are still issues pending
in relation to charges for the use of water resources
by the hydroelectric sector, which are still subject to
budget spending constraints.
2. Difficulties inherent to the State’s administrative
culture – as a rule, the States are resistant to reform
and modernization processes, and react negatively to
all attempts at change. In the field of water resources
management, such resistance has been manifested
in attempts (i) to limit the managerial and financial
autonomy of regulatory agencies such as ANA, either by
imposing budget spending constraints, or by demanding
adoption of the same bureaucratic procedures that
hamper the effectiveness of other segments of the
 Executive Summary

public administration; and, (ii) to impose procedural
regulations upon entities governed by private law (civic
associations and foundations) engaged in partnerships
with the State for the management of river basins,
thereby interfering with their flexibility to contract staff,
and hold tenders for procurement of goods, services,
and engineering works. Under Brazil’s political and
institutional traditions, it is not uncommon for decision-
making to be delegated, without allowing effective
decentralization. In other words, many procedures at
the local level are dependent upon decisions taken at
a higher level, when it ought to be possible to adopt
solutions independently, provided that they do not
violate specific policy guidelines or the interests of
third parties.
3. Challenges relating to the dual jurisdiction
over water bodies – Brazil is a Federative Republic,
comprised of 26 States, a Federal District, and 5,563
Municipalities. In principle, the Federal Union, the
States, and the Municipalities all enjoy administrative
autonomy. Brazil’s Constitution establishes that water
is a public good, under the jurisdiction of the Federal
Union or of the States, that can be used subject to
licensing. Municipalities do not have jurisdiction over
water bodies. On the other hand, public services that
use water may be operated by bodies at different levels,
subject to authorizations for the provision of public
services. For example, for electric-power generation,
the Conceding Power is a Federal authority; whereas
basic sanitation services (provision of drinking water,
sewage drains, and solid-waste collection) are the
responsibility of the municipalities. Some rivers under
federal jurisdiction have tributaries that are under the
jurisdiction of a state, if their headwaters and mouth
are both in the same state. In short, governance
of water resources management depends upon a
degree of cooperation between the various levels of
Government (a river basin being the common territory
of the Federal, State, and Municipal authorities). Such
cooperation, especially between the federal and
state levels, poses one of the greatest challenges to
implementation of SINGREH, and requires great efforts
to promote integration and coordination among the
various levels.1
4. Distortion of Concepts and Premises in the
Implementation of SINGREH – adequate implementation
of SINGREH requires observance of the principles of
the National Water Resources Policy, when interpreting
current legal standards or applying provisions of Law
9.433/97. In line with these principles, four sets of
management instruments must be deployed: Command
and Control Instruments of a disciplinary nature
imposed by the State, such as licensing; Socially Shared
Management Instruments that involve the State and
other players, such as Basin Committees; and Economic
Management Instruments that entail price mechanisms
such as Water Use Charges, under the responsibility
of Water Agencies. Though not strictly subordinated
to SINGREH, the fourth set corresponds to Voluntary
Compliance Mechanisms, such as ISO 9000 and ISO
14000 standards, normally assumed by productive
enterprises that wish to preserve their competitivity.
It is worth noting that, even in those states where
implementation of SINGREH has advanced the most,
the concepts that underlie its execution have neither
been sufficiently well assimilated, nor fully applied.
Institutional strategies
Certain of the problems faced during
implementation of SINGREH stem from flaws in the
institutional strategies adopted. Some states (and
certain areas of the Federal administration) have
concentrated efforts on the establishment of basin
committees, in the belief that public participation
alone would lead to achievement of the desired
results. In reality, only when management activities are
organized in the form of basin plans, backed by viable
sources of funding, can such advances be achieved.
Thus, in the absence of management instruments that
secure regular funding, many committees have proven
unable to make significant contributions toward
effective management in their respective basins.

1
One example of difficulties that stem from dual jurisdiction over water bodies is the two committees, one at the state level and the other at
the federal level, that share jurisdiction over the Piracicaba, Capivari and Jundiaí (PCJ) river basins, with an overlap that encompasses over
90% of their respective territories, and practically the same membership. Another example is the Paraíba do Sul river basin where, aside from
the federal Paraíba do Sul River Basin Integration Committee (CEIVAP), there are no less than five state-level committees (for tributary basins
and specific stretches of the river) and nine inter-municipal consortia or associations of water users.

49
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
Among issues that need to be addressed is
failure, at certain of the component bodies (councils,
committees and basin agencies) to assimilate the
principles of shared and participatory management.
The consequence of this is a proliferation of meetings,
usually within the scope of Technical Chambers and
Committees, which greatly add to the operational
costs of the System. A more rational division of labor
among such bodies and their technical support staff
ought to be pursued, to reduce operational costs and
ensure a more focused approach toward achievement
of the goals and objectives of SINGREH.
ANA and the Secretariat for Water Resources of the
Ministry of Environment, especially, need to concentrate
on fostering links and improving communications and
cooperation with the states and water-user sectors.
Such coordination is of fundamental importance in the
50
light of current budgetary and financial conditions
since, although these two federal bodies are directly
responsible for stewardship of the Nation’s water
resources, they handle only 5% of the investments that
affect the water resources sector, whereas water-user
sectors (such as electric-power generation, sanitation,
irrigation and others) provide the remaining 95%.
Thus, many of the guidelines that ought to orient water
resources programs and projects, in effect tend to be
conditioned by sectoral interfaces.
Issues relating to coordination also entail securing
greater participation of municipalities in the
implementation of management strategies, given that
it is at the municipal level that a series of significant
variables (including land use and settlement
regulations, sanitation services, drainage interventions,
and disposal of solid wastes) must be resolved.
Lagoa Manguaba/AL – Photo: Eraldo Peres
 Executive Summary

Box 3: Territorial bases and the water resources management map

The Water Law established the river basin as the
territorial unit for implementation of the National
Water Resources Policy (PNRH). However, in view of
jurisdictional differences between bodies of water, the
vast size of Brazil, and the diversity of socioeconomic,
cultural, and hydrographic conditions, there is a need
to establish clear criteria, within the scope of these
territorial definitions, in support of implantation of
the National Water Resources Management System
(SINGREH).
In methodological terms, effective promotion
of integrated water resources management must
necessarily entail adoption of variable geometric
scales to encompass a variety of analysis perspectives
of a spatial and sectoral nature, in order to take into
account such disparate realities as, for example, the
Pantanal and the São Paulo metropolitan region, both
of which share the same basin (the Paraná).
ANA has proposed a more flexible complementary
methodology to enable spatial ‘cross-cuts’ that permit
adjustment of the various factors that intervene in the
definition of territorial management units, and water
resources management instruments that need not be
deployed in exactly the same way in every region,
thus fostering more flexible application of institutional
alternatives for each case.

Piranhas-Açu

Curimataú (...)
Amazon
Goiana (...)
Parnaíba
Una / Jacuípe

Tocantins/ Mundaú (...)

Araguaia S. Francisco Vaza-Barris
Real / Piauí-SE

Jequitinhonha/
Pardo
Mucuri/
Extremo Sul-BA
Paraguay
Itaúnas / São Mateus
Terra Seca
Tabapoana / Itapemirim
Pirapanema
Paraíba do Sul

Iguaçu Ribeira do Iguape/

Litoral Sul
Uruguay

A = Monitoring, Strategic Planning, D = (C) + Committee, Basin Plan,

Information System, and Capacity Building Agency, and Water Use Charges

B = (A) + Licensing, Inspection, State Jurisdiction

and Basin Agencies in critical regions

C = (B) + Licensing System,

Inspection, and Registration

Units that encompass the territory of only one State
were not initially classified, however, it was found
that some have characteristics that extend beyond
the local and state levels. In such units, the federal
level should provide support for efforts of the states to
deploy management instruments.
The “Management Map” should not be construed
as a unilateral imposition of institutional arrangements
and management instruments that must be deployed
for every river basin or hydrographic region. Rather, it
aims to plot the institutional progress achieved toward
meeting priorities, and the consistency of solutions
to be employed in the various different basins and
regions, without restricting local initiatives that may
fully and legitimately contribute toward attainment of
goals initially identified in the “Management Map”.

Source: Map of Management Actions for River Basins – ANA, October/2006.

51
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
IV – Scenarios
Prospective analyses were carried out under
the National Water Resources Plan (2006) with
the aim of assessing quantitative and qualitative
aspects of future demand for water resources in
Brazil, in the light of the consolidated worldwide
scenario and in line with recommendations of the
GEO methodology, using a time horizon stretching
to 2020.
The Plan postulates three possible world scenarios
that could influence developments in Brazil; it
also outlines three possible Brazilian scenarios,
depending upon the degree to which political
stability is maintained, and economic development,
environmental sustainability, and social inclusion are
achieved over the next 13 years.
In presenting alternative worldwide scenarios, the
Plan offers the following possibilities: (i) a long cycle
of prosperity; (ii) exclusionary dynamism; and (iii)
instability and fragmentation.
For Brazil, the proposed scenarios are as follows:
1. Water for All – a scenario of greater economic
growth with reduced social inequality. Under
this scenario there is an expansion of economic
activity throughout Brazil, with strong but
declining impacts on water resources. Water use
management becomes more effective as SINGREH
is strengthened, with fewer water use conflicts over
quantities abstracted and less damage in terms of
water quality.
2. Water for Some – a scenario with reasonable
levels of economic growth accompanied by social
exclusion, and heavy impacts on water resources.
Conflicts and problems relating to water use become
more common, and the quality of available water is
jeopardized.
3. Water for Few – a scenario of low growth,
with less pressure on urban infrastructure and
logistics. Non-sustainable economic activities
predominate; there may be an increase in water
use conflicts, and water supply problems may
proliferate as groundwater suffers contamination,
with consequent increases in the incidence of
waterborne diseases.
52
Analysis of these prospective scenarios reveals
certain common elements or “invariables”, i.e.,
factors present whichever scenario is selected. Such
invariables include:
• An increase in environmental sanitation problems;
• Expansion of rural activities, especially irrigation;
• Implantation of multiple-use infrastructure for
production of hydroelectricity and for inland
waterways, observing environmental and social
concerns;
• The need to conserve strategic aquifers;
• The need to expand knowledge and develop
technologies; and,
• Indispensable investments to promote more effective
water resources management.
It is important to remember that the water resources
management sector does not have competences or
instruments to tackle all the social variables that affect
these prospective scenarios and the macroeconomic
development context.
Nonetheless, by taking “invariables” into account,
it is possible to reduce uncertainties and anticipate
trends associated with the various hypotheses, and
to prepare a consistent national policy. The approach
adopted by the National Water Resources Plan
includes not only proactive thinking with regard
to variables that affect water resources, but also
preventative strategies for attenuating economic,
social, and environmental impacts, with a view to
avoiding certain trends associated with the least
desirable scenarios.
Unquestionably, there will be an increase
in the consumption of water resources, both for
public water supply and for economic activities.
For example, the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock
and Food Supply estimates that, to the current
62 million hectares under cultivation in Brazil,
an additional 30 million hectares will be added
over the next 15 years. Part of this expansion will
result from cultivation of areas currently used as
grazing land, and part from the application of
new technologies and increased productivity of
livestock raising. Such expansion implies additional
demand for irrigation water and transport of grain,
 Executive Summary

and a consequent increase in demand for inland Sanitation

shipping. Thus, multiple use of water becomes a
key strategy.
The degree of increase of economic activity will
condition demand for electric power. Brazil’s hydroelectric
generating potential has been estimated at 260 GW,
whereas current installed capacity amounts to 73.6
GW. Thus Brazil is in a relatively comfortable position
with regard to energy potential. Much of this potential,
however, is located in the North region where the building
of dams is likely to face serious social and environmental
challenges.
Sanitation is an area in which Brazil faces huge
challenges, if it is to meet the commitments assumed
under the Millennium Development Goals.
According to the Ministry of Cities, to attain the
goal of universal water supply and sewage collection by
2020, investments of the order of R$ 180 billion will be
required. This amounts to annual investment of roughly
0.45% of GDP over the next two decades. The major
portion of such investments will have to be earmarked
for the Paraná basin, where the greatest concentrations
of the Brazilian population are located.

Table 2: Investments required in water supply and sewerage systems up until 2020, to achieve
the goal of universal services, by hydrographic region (Reais million)

Hydrographic Region Water Supply Sewerage Total

Amazon 4,354 6,844 11,198

Tocantins-Araguaia 3,332 4,906 8,238

Atlantic Western NE 1,735 2,568 4,302

Parnaíba 1,089 1,692 2,782

Atlantic Eastern NE 5,838 10,133 15,971

São Francisco 4,619 7,235 11,855

Atlantic East 4,694 7,241 11,935

Atlantic Southeast 9,217 16,189 25,406

Atlantic South 5,566 9,482 15,048

Uruguay 1,896 3,216 5,111

Paraná 24,526 39,536 64,062

Paraguay 966 1,532 2,498

Total 67,831 110,574 178,405

Sewerage will require roughly 62% of the total the Program for Depollution of River Basins (PRODES),
investment. Were it not for specific initiatives, such as it is very unlikely that this goal would be met.

53
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Graph 22: Investments in sewerage up until 2020, to achieve the goal of universal services.

45.000

40.000
Investments up to 2020 (reais million)

35.000

30.000

25.000

20.000

15.000

10.000

5.000

0
Amazon

Tocantins
Araguaia

Western
Northeast

Parnaíba

Eastern
Northeast

São Francisco

East Atlantic

Southeast
Atlantic

South Atlantic

Uruguay

Paraná

Paraguay
Hydrographic regions

Under the Water for All scenario, the projections To this end, it is necessary to proceed with
considered advances in water resources management the implantation of the National Water Resources
systems, and especially the deployment of water use Management System (SINGREH); prepare and
charges as an alternative for financing installation implement basin plans; ensure integration with other
of sewerage systems. It is foreseen that the greatest public policies; and secure the necessary public
progress will be made in the Southeast Atlantic, South participation inherent to the process, by enlisting and
Atlantic, Paraná, and Uruguay hydrographic regions. educating stakeholders to participate at the various
In other regions, relatively less progress is to be levels of the System.
expected, especially in those basins that face the most It is also essential that various management
serious problems but still have greatest capacity to pay instruments, and especially Water Use Charges be
for management services. The basins with low indices extensively deployed, in view of their strategic role
of sewage collection and treatment tend to be those in in regulating and promoting rational use of water, and
which there are few large-scale industries. of the importance of securing independent sources
An examination of the above described prospective of funding, provided by the users themselves, to
scenarios indicates the presence of an additional underwrite investments necessary to ensure future
invariable that could have serious negative repercussions: availability of water resources.
namely, the risk that overly bureaucratic or ineffective Finally, in view of the need to manage an
implantation of SINGREH could hamper its capacity to environment undergoing constant if gradual
effect objective interventions. In other words, regardless transformation, especially in the light of global
of which scenario proves correct, the building of a climate change, the implantation of water resources
future in which undesirable impacts can be foreseen, management systems needs to be flexible and
and ample supplies of high quality water are ensured, adaptable, to reflect changing conditions. This
presupposes the establishment of a strong and effective concept and other related issues are further
water resources management system in Brazil. discussed in the following chapter.

54

V – Proposals and recommendations
for sustainable water resources in Brazil
Following on from the overview presented in the
chapters on the status of water resources in Brazil,
the pressures and impacts that affect such resources,
responses adopted to address such pressures, and
possible future scenarios, 95 recommendations
and proposals have been prepared, with the aim of
assisting decision makers in their efforts to build a
sustainable future for water resources in Brazil. These
95 proposals have been consolidated and synthesized
in this Executive Summary, and the full version can be
viewed in the GEO Brazil Water Resources report.
Three lines of investigation guide the proposals
and recommendations presented:
1. The main line relates to guidelines and principles
enunciated in the National Water Resources
Plan, the objectives of which are based upon
innumerable consultations, studies, and research.
Efforts concentrated upon preparing convergent
proposals, in line with programs and projects
contained in the Plan, and these are now in the
final stages of preparation.
2. The second line of investigation sought to organize
aspects and singularities that comprise the typology
of the problems identified in the chapter on
Pressures and Impacts, and sought to frame specific
questions that need to be addressed with regard to
these areas and/or themes.
3. Lastly, a third line was established, based on
observations listed in other chapters of this report,
indicating paths, alternatives, and prospects for
strengthening and enhancing SINGREH.
The guidelines established in the National Plan are
based on a crossing of so-called “critical uncertainties”
(the dynamics of the national and international
economy, the need for sanitation, the energy mix,
effective implantation of SINGREH, and investments
in environmental protection and water resources
management) with the expectations of the various
relevant stakeholders (other countries, multilateral
agencies, water resources users, etc.). The crossing of
such variables leads to identification of “invariables”,
i.e., factors that persist in all prospective scenarios, as
described in the chapter on Scenarios.
The result of the crossing of elements necessary for a
robust national strategy can be summarized as follows:
Executive Summary
• Adoption of a pro-active attitude toward water
resources management, with the aim of inducing
the desired scenarios through the use of more agile
information systems and more flexible strategies,
capable of surmounting uncertainties and better
exploiting opportunities;
• The strengthening of SINGREH as a decentralized
and participative system, with emphasis upon
articulation with user segments, based upon a
positive agenda with accountability for negative
environmental impacts and the cost these impose
upon production processes and the provision of
services on the part of these user segments;
• Expansion of management activities, using
mechanisms beyond the traditional command and
control focus, with emphasis upon deployment of
economic management instruments and shared
institutional management arrangements, for fostering
sustainable and efficient use of water resources;
• More extensive articulation among bodies responsible
for water resources management, in the context of
macro-economic development policies, through
incorporation of cross-cutting guidelines, with
emphasis upon multiple use and environmental
aspects;
• Launching of public information activities, to
disseminate awareness of the importance of water
resources management instruments; and,
• Definition of results-oriented indicators for
measuring outcomes and instituting of a system
for continuous monitoring and adjustment to
enhance the implementation of water resources
management.
Taking such elements into consideration,
application of the GEO methodology led to formulation
of proposals and recommendations (convergent
with programs and projects of the National Water
Resources Plan) organized in accordance with the
following thematic lines:
• Promote shared management with neighboring
countries of transboundary rivers and strategic
aquifers, and conduct strategic studies to
complement Brazil’s participation in the global and
South-American context;
55
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
• Consider endogenous factors and vectors of
development, and especially those that affect water
resources, including the outlining of territorial units
for intervention in accordance with the dynamics of
such (hydrological, environmental, socioeconomic
and political-institutional) factors;
• Enhance SINGREH, and especially its articulations
and capacity to generate its own funding. This
implies support for the organization of state-level
management systems, with the aim of instituting
more effective decentralization of policies, through
capacity building and consolidation at the local level
for facing up to issues relating to water resources;
• Consolidate the current legal and institutional
framework, to harmonize SINGREH, the administrative
structure of the Brazilian State, and the model foreseen
under national legislation, to take into account Brazil’s
social and environmental diversity;
• Place greater emphasis upon implementation and
operation of management instruments, including: a
database on water availability, demand, and users;
upgrading of licensing procedures; integration
with other instruments such as environmental
licensing; integrated inspection procedures;
continuous integration among environmental and
water resources information systems, currently
underway; better coordination between the local
and state water resources plans and the National
Plan; development of procedures for instituting
water use charges; and promoting of public access
to information on water resources, as a means of
providing support for decision making;
• Establish a pro-active agenda of links between water
resources policies and other public policies, based upon
better articulation between users of water resources and
public institutions, focusing upon water as an essential
public good for sustainable development;
• Promote multiple and integrated use of water, with a
special focus on facing up to critical events (drought
and flooding); rational water use; demand management
policies and efforts to increase supplies of water
through planning of integrated solutions for urban
environmental problems; water and soil conservation
measures in rural areas, for the preservation of
ecosystems; protection of groundwater; and the
resolution of water use conflicts;
• Develop regional programs adapted to specific
problems that must be tackled; and,
56
• Conduct systematic evaluations of the SINGREH
implementation process.
With respect to the second line of investigation,
a further set of proposals was drawn up, targeted at
apportioning the spatial selection to the typology of
problems that must be addressed:
• In the Amazon and Pantanal regions, the
predominant themes relate to environmental
preservation (biodiversity, environmental services,
combating deforestation, mitigation of the social
and environmental impacts of large-scale projects,
control of point-specific pollution, and multiple use
of water). In the Pantanal, special attention must be
devoted to the basins of the Cuiabá, Miranda, and
Taquari rivers;
• In the Cerrado, the main focus is upon improving the
efficiency of water use, by means of the installation
and strengthening of state water resources
management bodies and improving the delimitation
of planning and management units;
• Water scarcity is the main focus in Semi-arid Areas,
and available water and demand need to be better
managed, through adaptation of management
instruments to regional realities. Addressing aspects
such as serving the needs of sparsely distributed
populations in rural areas of Brazil’s Northeast
region, while improving water supply networks that
serve urban areas and ensuring adequate sewage
collection and treatment, are also high priorities;
• To address the problems of large conurbations
and metropolitan regions, including towns located
in the zona da mata and coastal areas of Brazil’s
Northeast, there is a pressing need for inter-sectoral
approaches that transcend territorial boundaries to
address environmental problems and concentrations
of poverty (favelas and squatter settlements in valley
bottoms, on hillsides, and in other high-risk areas);
• In the coastal zone of the South and Southeast
regions, where there are great seasonal fluctuations
in population, the proposals relate to control of land
use and settlement patterns, with the aim of restoring
water quality at beaches, thereby preserving
the attractiveness of the region for tourism, and
environmental and geographic features including
mangroves and sand spits;
• In rural areas where extensive and intensive farming
is carried out, priority should be given to land
management and soil and water conservation, such

as no tillage and contour bunds, barriers to contain
erosion, refurbishing of rural roads, protection of
riparian forests, control of agricultural chemicals
and disposal of packaging, with specific attention
to agribusiness hubs. At the same time, attention
should be paid to the preservation and consolidation
of “corridors of biodiversity” that link conservation
areas, native and riparian forests; and
• With respect to groundwater, it is necessary to
expand and disseminate knowledge of the dynamics
of aquifers, including replenishment areas, avoiding
risks of contamination, and establishing interfaces
between land use patterns and potentially
sustainable exploitation, by deploying and
adapting management instruments so as to protect
groundwater and finance management activities,
within the framework of the National Water
Resources Policy.
Finally, the points raised in this report were
systematized, and the following proposals were
made for fostering further progress of integrated water
resources management in Brazil:
• Promote sustainable and rational exploitation of the
comparative advantages that abundant available
water provide;
• Conduct strategic studies on the national
development context, stressing the importance
attributed to water resources;
• Contemplate the various spatial scales of analysis,
with the aim of integrating water resources planning
with macroeconomic planning;
• Strengthen inter-sectoral ties for water resources
management, through more substantive participation
of the municipalities in SINGREH and state water
resources management systems;
• Include the theme of water resources planning
onto the agendas and programs of water users, by
harnessing enhanced investment capacities;
• Prioritize deployment of SINGREH management
instruments, with a results-oriented focus, and
develop sustainability indicators and a permanent
evaluation system for measuring progress obtained
at the federal and state levels;
• Through the offices of ANA, encourage the States
to institute and strengthen their water resources
management bodies, since these are essential for
achieving progress in this area;
Executive Summary
• Promote scientific and technological development in
the field of water resources, and public awareness
of environmental issues relating to water resources
management;
• Conduct in-depth studies in the field of Water Law,
with the aim of resolving possible legal disputes;
• Explore synergies between water resources
management and efforts underway to modernize
the Brazilian State;
• Consider the establishment of integration committees
(or federations of committees) as an alternative
applicable to very large river basins, with the aim of
harnessing local public participation in support of
the management system;
• Stimulate policies for effective decentralization of water
resources management, by ensuring a more balanced
sharing of responsibilities among the Public Authorities,
water users, and civil society, in accordance with the
availability of local capacities and the potential of the
Federal Government to participate;
• Apply, whenever possible, the principle of
subsidiarity, to ensure that problems are dealt with
at the level closest to their source, and referred
to higher levels only when the local level proves
incapable of resolving them;
From examination of the proposals and
recommendations of GEO Brazil Water Resources, it
can be surmised that the National Water Resources
Management System (created by Law 9.433/97 and
complemented by Law 9.984/00 that created the
National Water Agency - ANA) and the National Water
Resources Plan, approved in 2006, are fully endowed
with all the necessary elements to enable Brazil, in the
long term, to promote sustainable management of its
water resources.
To this end, it is necessary that the National
Water Resources Policy and its instruments be fully
implemented, taking into account regional differences.
The institutional structure needs to be successfully
assimilated by the full array of stakeholders, and
reliable sources of funding for implementation of the
process must be secured.
How successful the National Water Resources
Plan will be depends upon its capacity to respond with
flexibility to the specificities and processes inherent to
each thematic or territorial context, without relaxing
the technical standards and established guidelines.
57
 GEO Brasil | Water Resources | Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
SINGREH has been endowed with the necessary
management instruments to fulfill its goals. Now
it is up to each component to assume its role, in
accordance with the model: i.e., it is incumbent upon
the agencies to prepare their proposals and technical
inputs; the committees to debate and approve the
necessary measures; and the regulatory bodies to
implement their decisions using the appropriate
instruments. It is, moreover, essential that the Federal
authorities and those of the states and municipalities
engage constructively in coordinated efforts to ensure
fulfillment of their respective roles, and seek to
58
resolve difficulties identified during the early phases
of implantation of the System. Finally, it is immensely
important that water users and other stakeholders
effectively assume their share of responsibility by
participating fully in the SINGREH decision-making
process.
In brief, it is necessary that the lessons learned
up to the present time be fully assimilated by all
stakeholders and converted into adjustments and
corrections in course, in order to ensure that the
process of instituting water resources management in
Brazil gains scale and advances at the desired rate.
Pantanal/MS – Photo: Arquivo TDA
 Executive Summary

Brazil in brief Sources:

Location: South America

Guiana; Venezuela; Suriname; French Guiana; Uruguay; Argentina; Paraguay; Bolivia;

Neighboring countries IBGE (2000)
Peru; Colombia.

Equatorial, tropical, highland tropical, tropical atlantic or humid tropical, subtropical http://www.suapesquisa.
Climates of Brazil
and semi-arid. com/clima/clima-brasil.gif
Total area:
8,514,876.599 km2
Percentage of Latin IBGE (2000)
47%
America
Amazônia 4,196,943 km2 49.29% of Brazil
Cerrados 2,036,448 km2 23.92% of Brazil
Mata Atlântica 1,110,182 km2 13.04% of Brazil
Brazilian Biomes IBGE (2006)
Caatinga 844,453 km2 9.92% of Brazil
Pampa 176,496 km2 2.07% of Brazil
Pantanal 150,355 km2 1.76% of Brazil

Men: 88,673,733 Urban: 152,711,363

Population 182,060,108 IBGE, 2005 - PNAD
Women: 93,386,375 Rural: 31,677,257

IBGE (2001)
States 26 States and a Federal District
http://www.brasil.gov.
Municipalities 5,563
br/pais/

Political-administrative regions

Area: 3,869,637 km2

States: Acre, Amazonas, Roraima,
Percentage of Brazil: 45.3%
Pará, Rondônia, Amapa, Tocantins
North Population: 12,900,704 (7.6% of the total)
States: 7
Urban: 9,014,365
Municipalities: 449
Rural: 3,886,339

Area: 1,561,177km2 States: Maranhão, Piaui, Ceará, Rio

Percentage of Brazil: 18.2% Grande do Norte, Bahia, Sergipe,
Northeast Population: 47,741.711 (28,1% of the total) Paraíba, Alagoas, Pernambuco
Urban: 32,975.425 States: 9
Rural: 14,766.286 Municipalities: 1,792
Sources: IBGE, 2000
http://www.ibge.gov.br
Area: 1,612,077km2
States: Distrito Federal, Goias, Mato
Percentage of Brazil: 18,9%
Central-West Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul
Population: 11,636,728 (6.9% of the total)
States: 3, 1 DF
Urban: 10,092,976
Municipalities: 463
Rural: 1,543,752

Area: 927,286 km2

States: Minas Gerais, Rio de
Percentage of Brazil: 10.8%
Janeiro, Espírito Santo, São Paulo.
Southeast Population: 72,412,411 (42.6% of the total)
States: 4
Urban: 65,549,194
Municipalities: 1188
Rural: 6,863,217

Area: 577,214 km2

States: Paraná, Santa Catarina, Rio
Percentage of Brazil: 6,8%
South Grande do Sul
Population: 25,107,616 (14.8% of the total)
States: 3
Urban: 20,321,999
Municipalities: 1668
Rural: 4,785,617
http://www.ibge.gov.br/
Area under cultivation 49 million/ha in the 2004/2005 harvest

Source: Ministry of
Cattle herd 205 million head in 2004 Agriculture, Livestock and
Food Supply and IBGE
Grain production 113,892 million tonnes in the 2004/2005 harvest http://www.ibge.gov.br/

Gross Domestic Product

R$ 1.9 trillion in 2005
(GDP)
http://www.brasil.gov.br/
pais/indicadores/cat_eco/
Surplus US$ 44.7 billion in 2005
categoria 
Illiteracy rate 11.2% among persons over the age of 15 in 2004

59
 Printed on Reciclato Paper.
Cover pages 240 g/m2 and inside pages 90 g/m2
 GEO-Brazil
Brazil

GEO Brazil Water Resources is the first report of the GEO Brazil
Brazil
Series. By exploring prospects opened up by use of the GEO
methodology, it aims to contribute toward a comprehensive
and integrated evaluation of concepts and premises, and of the
OR DE M E
PRO
GR
ES
SO
Water Resources
Executive Summary
Component of a Series of Reports on the
Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil
organizational and legal framework and management instruments
that comprise the National Water Resources System (SINGREH).

Water Resources
Publication of this report takes on special significance, as it marks
the tenth anniversary of the enactment of Brazil’s Water Law (Law
9.433, of January 8, 1997).

Component of a Series of Reports on the Status and Prospects for the Environment in Brazil

Ministry of
Environment
N AT I O N A L WAT E R A G E N C Y
N AT I O N A L WAT E R A G E N C Y