A new study published in the journal Science suggests that protecting existing Amazonian forests from threats like selective logging and wildfires is a more cost-effective way to preserve biodiversity and carbon storage than trying to restore forests on land that has already been cleared. Researchers from Lancaster University, along with scientists from the UK, Brazil, Sweden, and Australia, analyzed data from over 3 million hectares in the Brazilian states of Pará, focusing on areas around Santarém and Paragominas between 2010 and 2020. Using high-resolution satellite images, field surveys of 381 transects across 38 watersheds, and models tracking 160 bird species and 426 tree species, the team compared the effectiveness of different conservation strategies. They also evaluated the costs of each approach to determine which provided the most benefit for the resources invested. The study found that preventing wildfires had the most significant impact on preserving biodiversity and carbon stocks. Professor Jos Barlow, a senior author, stressed the need for urgent action to prevent and manage wildfires, especially as the 2026 El Niño climate event and global climate change are expected to bring longer, hotter, and more intense dry seasons to the Amazon’s "arc of deforestation." Avoiding disturbances in existing forests—such as logging—was also found to be highly effective, offering major benefits for biodiversity and nearly as much value as preventing deforestation itself for carbon protection. Restoration efforts, while still beneficial, were found to be less effective and more costly, particularly when applied to land that had already been converted to agriculture. However, restoration was more impactful on properties where most of the original forest had already been lost. According to Dr. Leonardo Miranda, the lead author, conservation efforts must go beyond simply preventing deforestation and include measures to protect forests from other types of damage, such as logging or fires. The study recommends that conservation resources be directed based on the specific conditions of each area. The best results—both in terms of biodiversity and carbon storage—were achieved when both protection and restoration strategies were used together. Dr. Joice Ferreira, a co-author, emphasized that restoring forests without protecting existing ones is ineffective, while Dr. Toby Gardner noted that companies involved in global trade of commodities like soy and beef have a responsibility to address both deforestation and forest degradation. The findings may also apply to other tropical regions facing deforestation and could influence conservation policies worldwide.