A New Kind of NGOWhat was missing from that volatile mix, Uhl thought, was reliable scientific data. Very little careful work had been done on deforestation, and important facets of the problem had been misunderstood or ignored. Armed with a grant from the MacArthur Foundation, he and a colleague from the University of Wisconsin, Toby McGrath, conspired to start a new kind of non-governmental organization, or NGO. Instead of pushing political action, it would focus on research—but research squarely aimed at solving a dire real-world problem. Its sole purpose would be to provide the kind of high-quality information that Uhl believed would enable policymakers and other stakeholders to make environmentally conscious decisions, and stop the destruction.
The purity of his vision was regarded by many as naïve—even McGrath soon left the project. The best way to pull it off, Uhl decided, would be to draft young Brazilians fresh out of school, a dozen students whose idealism and passion might as yet be undimmed. But that choice presented huge challenges of its own, since Uhl’s charges were as green as they were eager. Most of them, moreover, coming of age at such a turbulent time, had to be convinced that impartial research, not activism, was the surest way to effect change.
"It was way too early to write off the Amazon as a system that was irrevocably damaged."
Not surprisingly, the first few years were a period of intense struggle. “It was the hardest time of my life,” Uhl says. “My hair went from blond to gray in about three years.” Verissimo, his first recruit, remembers it as a kind of boot camp.
“We spent a lot of time in the field, just understanding the reality of the forest,” he says. “Getting close to the problem. This was something Chris stressed.”
At the same time, they were getting a crash course in academic practice. “We were 20, 21, 22 years old, and we had to learn how to write papers that would be publishable in quality journals, how to present our work at conferences. It was a very high standard we had to achieve in a short period of time.”
Uhl was inspiring, encouraging – and relentless. “We would do things 30 or 40 times before they were good enough,” Verissimo says. And while they were earning their academic chops, they also had to learn to see beyond good guys vs. bad guys.
“It was not a conscious ideological choice,” Uhl remembers. “Imazon was so field-based that if we wanted to learn about logging, we had to go out and meet loggers. When we did, we saw these men for what they were—tough, hard-working survivors, just trying to carve a life out of this wilderness. They cared about what they were doing, and they wanted to learn. There was a rapport that developed, based on this trust that was established face to face.”
Instead of treating loggers as the enemy, the Imazon team undertook to help them, by demonstrating that logging could be done sustainably, with far less waste, and without sacrificing profit or the well-being of the forest. The team produced training manuals and best-practices videos grounded in painstaking comparative research. They developed a comprehensive forest-management plan that became widely adopted, and is still in use today.