VARESE (Italy), July 10, 2025 – By GIANNI BERALDO
A journey between jungle and concrete, an alarm cry for our planet, and a deep reflection on the meaning of dependence and interconnectedness.
We discussed this with conservation biologist and environmental activist Emanuela Evangelista, author of the beautiful book “Amazzonia. Una vita nel cuore della foresta” (Laterza editore).
It’s a personal story, an account of life lived in close contact with the Amazon’s nature and its inhabitants, particularly the natives of Xixuaú, a village located in the heart of the Amazon where Emanuela has chosen to live for many years. Among her many initiatives, the most important is founding the Amazônia association, a non-profit organization that has been committed to protecting the Amazon rainforest for 20 years (amazoniabr.org).
In this long Zoom interview, the Milanese biologist touched on crucial themes: from the dynamics of the Amazon rainforest to the challenges of modern society, the survival of indigenous people, and the future of humanity.
Emanuela, you live in a fascinating hut. It’s beautiful.
It’s a small hut. Yes, exactly.
First of all, thank you for the interview because the book particularly struck me. Like the chapter about the howler monkey that snuck into your room, even ending up on your bed. But I didn’t understand one thing: why, in the end, after all that cuddling and hugging, as we might call it, did it get scared?
The reason it got scared is because I offered it my hand. It was on the bed, I offered my hand, it extended its own, and the moment I took it, I made the mistake of pulling it towards me. Animals never like sudden movements; they scare them. I was foolish, thinking there was a great familiarity now, so I could even afford to pull it, because I wanted it to come into my arms. It reacted by biting me like crazy. Imagine a room, which wasn’t as full of things as it is now, but barer. There was only this four-poster bed, then a type of furniture with shelves, and a wardrobe. From the bed, it jumped on me, then on the furniture, then on the wardrobe, just crazy until it left. Everything here is open, so there are no obstacles to entering or leaving.
I imagine you got scared
Oh, yes, when it jumped and bit. It hurt me especially. Well, it was one of many lessons because the Amazon is a continuous school. If you feel arrogant, the forest immediately puts you back in your place.
In one of the passages of the book, in the final chapter, you write: “Not being able to do it alone is the first lesson the Amazon offered me. Here I depend, I depend on others, others depend on resources, resources depend on the climate. The climate depends on many factors, which would mainly be human, right?” This, in my opinion, encapsulates the whole meaning of the book or at least a large part of the meaning of your whole beautiful life story that you’ve told. Do you agree?
I would say that this encapsulates my personal experience and the global experience. Even that of Homo sapiens on the planet. That is, the moment we broke the balance necessary for life and the survival of all species on this planet was the moment we deluded ourselves into believing we were independent, that we were a species so powerful that we no longer needed others. And by “others,” I mean any other living being, whether animal or plant, because we have created, even physically, spaces accessible to only one species, single-species spaces like the cities we live in, where no other species is desired besides us. It was a concept of building a fence. Everyone out, only humans in, and everything else out. This “everything else out” doesn’t work; it’s what created the global imbalances we face today. So, climate alteration, imbalances that are both ecosystemic, atmospheric, and climatic.
It’s true, even I think you can find in this sentence a concentration of what has caused so many, many imbalances. I was already saying this while living in the West, but I hadn’t truly assimilated it, I hadn’t really understood it. That is, what does it really mean to depend and be part of a network? You understand it much more easily when you return to live within that network. This anomalous detachment has truly led us to mental imbalances. Children, for example, don’t know where the food they eat comes from; they eat things they have never seen walk or grow. Without the environmental services that nature provides, you wouldn’t be able to survive. The moment you assimilate this thought, you make it your own, realizing that everything else deserves respect.
I think it’s also applicable in a city microcosm
Even in a city microcosm. Then, in reality, it’s a banality to say that we have created spaces where other species don’t exist, because nature doesn’t allow you to do that. I grew up in a normal family where I wasn’t taught a particular love for nature. I lived in the city; my mom was an average Italian woman who was scared of any insect, so the spider that came into the house, the cockroach, everything was unacceptable. So the idea is that you must have spaces that become airtight compartments, where no one else must enter unless invited: for example, the dog, but all others are undesirable. This is crazy. These are houses. This one I just showed you (says Emanuela, always highlighting her ‘hut-house’ in the Amazon) is a permeable structure. Apart from a companion animal like a cat, because it also has space, it’s permeable to all other animals; there’s a tarantula on the roof, and lizards under the furniture. In short, truly each of them has its function.
Did you ever bring your mom there?
My mom is gone, but in all these years, she never wanted to come. No, no, for her it was too much!
Listen, you’re a biologist, but what led you to live in the Amazon after your first trip for a thesis?
Look, it was truly a gift that life gave me. In the sense that I couldn’t have written a story
like that, I wouldn’t have imagined it, I wouldn’t have had enough imagination. So what life did instead was make me a biology student, and so far, everything was normal. I lived in Milan and volunteered for an environmental association, and again, everything was normal. And above all, we worked in Africa; we did these work things, perhaps I talk about it a bit in the book, but especially in the first book, “Ragazza in Africa.” From there, the work with this small association called Fondo per la Terra began, an association that at some point decided to start a project in the Amazon, after Africa and India. At the time, a form of project that was called “adopt a kilometer” was in vogue, which you surely remember.
Yes, I remember that initiative well
Exactly, you adopted a square kilometer of forest. We had raised a decent sum, and at some point, someone from us needed to come to the Amazon to bring them. So I decided to make this first trip on behalf of the association, bringing funds destined for the construction of a school, because what the village wanted was to build a school. So it was a first mission of international and voluntary cooperation, but for me, it was a turning point, in the sense that when I returned to Italy, I no longer wanted to hear about Africa, nor lions, nor all the things I had on my study plan. So, I decided to change everything, dedicating myself to the Amazon. From there, the thesis project and everything else came about.
And then it changed your life
And then it changed my life because the Amazon first engulfs you, and then you stay there to live.
But for them, you’re always the “gringa.”
I’m always the “gringa.” But they’re right, in the sense that you really can’t transform yourself. Also, I arrived in adulthood, you can’t truly transform yourself into a native. So some physiological limits, like hearing or sight, remain as they are.
I imagine, but that’s part of everyone’s nature
Yes, there’s a developmental age, which is when you’re very young, where you can acquire or develop things. My hippocampus is small, restricted, and I don’t orient myself well.
Speaking of changing environments, tell us about when you accompanied some natives from the village to Italy, taking them to conferences, etc. What was the public’s approach to them?
Well, there’s always great interest because obviously you expect, at least in my opinion, to find inspiration in the life experiences of others. So if someone comes from another planet, and the Amazon is a bit of another planet, a completely different world, the attention is particular.
You explained it very well in the book
The first time I accompanied natives to Italy was, I think, in 2008 or 2009. I still do it today, and there’s much more interest now than there was then. It’s a growing trend and has never decreased because environmental problems are becoming increasingly evident. Now it’s clear to everyone that the development model implemented in the West, or in industrialized countries, is not without negative consequences; quite the opposite.
We tend to look at what others are doing to see if someone has found a solution. And so we listen to them with curiosity. Personally, in recent years, I’ve pushed a lot in the direction of truly looking at these societies, those we once called primitive. Fortunately, this term is no longer used today because there’s nothing primitive about having made different choices. If you look at the peoples of the Amazon rainforest, or Oceania, but also in Africa, in Siberia, there are many populations still on the planet who have not adopted our development model, but have maintained others or developed different ones.
All this, well aware that there are others. Of course, even if aware that there are
others. But then you make choices. You chose the Western development model with a linear production: that is, you produce and discard, produce and discard, produce and discard. But if you look carefully at the rest of the planet, there are peoples who have not made this choice, looking instead at nature and saying. A native, an indigenous person teaches you that you cannot simply eat a fruit; the complete operation is to eat the fruit and plant the seed, otherwise you break the chain. It’s truly a mental concept, and this is taught to children. We don’t teach this natural circular system to children, so you understand that you raise societies that have completely different values.
So, I find it very interesting in this historical phase of ours to go and look at the results of these different developments. Simply, just on the environmental issue, if you look at Europe and the Amazon from above, you notice that the Amazon is almost twice the size of Europe, an enormous, vast territory: one has almost entirely preserved its vegetation cover, the other has become a network of roads, fields, cities; there isn’t a single tree left. Not even in the countryside do we have trees anymore! We have completely deforested in the name of development. It’s true that we have reached a certain level of well-being, but at what cost? At what price?
Indeed, this deforestation, as you also highlighted in the book, jeopardizes what you called ‘food security.’ At this rate, all the populations of that area, of that region, are seriously at risk.
Not just for that. But the risk of fires is also important. In those places, due to a particular climatic factor, significant thunderstorms and lightning develop. Natural combinations which, in addition to the significant and destructive hand of man, lead to an uncertain future for the entire region.
The future of that region looks bleak, but I would also say that of the entire planet
Certainly! The truth is that the Amazon is at risk of extinction, and I’m not saying this; all scientific studies, all predictive models, are saying it. This is a forest that has its days numbered, but truly its days in the real sense of the term. In fact, we’re talking about 15 years, 20 years, that is, not in 100 years.
Such a short period?
Very short. The 15-year issue is one that is finally being talked about a lot in Italy too, given that the WWF has launched a campaign to defend the Amazon, highlighting that the Amazon has 15 years of life left. You can say this without any fear. Then we hope that 15 years become 30, that 30 become 60, provided that changes are applied. But the current model says that with current deforestation rates and current temperature increases, what is happening is that the Amazon has already begun, in certain regions, to die on itself. We are talking about collapse. The issue of collapse is that, very simply, you have a humid forest, a tropical, rainforest that survives thanks to the humidity it can generate.
Yes, you also documented it well in the book, talking about the trade winds, etc… The moment you start to reduce the surface area of the forest (and today we are almost at 20% of the cut), the forest surface decreases. The rains that this forest generates are insufficient to maintain the degree of humidity that forest needs, making it much more vulnerable to fire, just as it becomes much easier to start fires. Temperatures have increased because of global warming. The Amazon catches fire; every year there’s an enormous amount of fires that put soot into the sky. The same soot also prevents rainfall. There’s a whole vicious circle whereby the Amazon is transforming into a savanna; that is, it no longer has the humidity that allows it to maintain itself as a forest. It’s becoming a somewhat drier ecosystem. You can see that species don’t tend to restore themselves due to lack of humidity, being naturally replaced by species that have adapted to live in drier, more arid environments.
Like the savanna
Exactly, so it’s moving in the direction of the savanna. This is dramatic because one might say, “Well, but no, on the planet sometimes biomes change, they were savannas and become forests, they were forests and become deserts.” It’s always happened. The important issue is that from a local point of view, the suffering of the 47 million people living in this region is certain. That is, the moment you destroy the forest, problems of food security, irrigation problems, arise, and not only in the Amazon.
A serious problem, I imagine. Rains that no longer reach everyone. But think also from a global point of view, this is what is being talked about most now, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, of climate gases you would have by losing the Amazon forest. Every tree, once cut or burned, releases an X amount of CO2 into the atmosphere. From the calculations made, it is estimated that there are more or less 400 billion trees in the Amazon; these 400 billion trees have a measurable carbon content, and if they were to be destroyed, die, or be burned or decompose, they would release something like 300 billion tons of CO2 equivalent into the atmosphere. This number, 300 billion tons, is practically 7 years, 8 years of current global emissions.
So this would obviously mean having already lost the war on climate change, meaning you no longer control it
Yes. The Amazon is one of these biomes, just like the oceans, that guarantee your survival on the planet. Without the Amazon, we can say goodbye to our species, not to the planet, because obviously, those who survive the heat will resist this torrid climate, but the human species would not make it. And this in the Amazon is unfortunately predicted, as I said, in 15-30 years.
In that sense, what are you proposing with your association? How have you been working all these years to raise awareness about the problem worldwide? Precisely as you said, awareness is an important part because, you see, despite everything we just talked about, the problem is still not widely discussed. It’s important that the world outside the Amazon understands that this destruction is not caused by the Amazonian peoples; on the contrary, it is a destruction that responds to an external demand to the Amazon, whether from the rest of Brazil or from Europe or China, it is an external demand that creates deforestation. The demand for soy, the demand for cattle ranching, etc. So awareness is fundamental. The simplest way to explain it is always that of two parallel tracks. To avoid the collapse we’ve talked about so far, two things essentially need to be done: the first is to protect the forest that still exists, that is, the one that is still standing, kept exactly as it is, intact, protected, with its biodiversity, with its cultures, traditions, the people who live there. The very principle is to keep it as it is. The other, working in the arc of deforestation, that is, in the area where the forest has already been cut for 30 or 40 years, there it is necessary to reforest. To restore the right balance in the biome, at least 10% of what has been cut needs to be replanted. So, we are working on these two tracks.
And what percentage of reforestation are we at now?
Zero.
But wait, don’t all these big companies operating in the Amazon always promise reforestation? Or are those just political ploys?
It depends on which companies you’re referring to. If the company is, for example, Petrobras, which is state-owned and deforests because it has to build, say, an oil pipeline. The companies that don’t reforest are the food companies. So, we’re talking about Cargill, Bunge, and others. The multinationals that buy soy, for example, don’t own anything. They buy soy from small landowners, and the landowners deforest, plant soy, and then sell it.
Well, but that’s where politics should intervene
More than politics, it’s about territorial control, so more police checks and fines would be needed. Controls are unfortunately very difficult due to immense geographical spaces, distances, logistics, economic issues. Brazil, however, is a country that doesn’t have many resources to allocate to these operations.
If I asked you for an image, a sound, a scent that immediately reminds you of the Amazon, no matter where you are in the world, what or how would you identify it?
Look, nowadays it’s become so easy even to come to Italy and hear parrots, so for me, it’s immediate. After the rain, the parrots start, and when I hear them, I’m home.
But was there a moment of crisis when you thought of giving up this life to return to Milan?
Never. In the sense that there were many moments of discouragement, yes. As well as moments of tiredness, fatigue, fear or feeling insecure: all this may have led me to think “My God, all that I left behind, that comfort, that security, that good food, a glass of wine, healthcare.” You have these moments of discouragement but never to the point of becoming so important that I’d say “Now I’m packing my bags and going home.”
But then you also found your life partner in the Amazon, right?
Yes, although I prefer not to talk about that topic as much. Anyway, he arrived 13 years later, meaning I commuted for 13 years.
Another thing that struck me while reading the book is when some natives from the village moved to live in the nearest city and then fell into alcoholism, heavy drugs, etc. I found it hard to imagine people living in one environment could negatively reshape themselves in another state of affairs.
I don’t know if they reshape themselves. That’s an interesting verb you used. I don’t know if they reshape, what I see is a constant phenomenon, that is, urban migration is constantly happening. But I see that they adapt, that is, they strive to adapt to that urban context, but they don’t profoundly reshape themselves. So the deep desire, however, is always to return to the forest. A desire that often remains just that, because these are interstellar journeys. Leaving the forest and going to live in the city, very often for many, means not being able to go back and build another house, due to lack of money. So, abandoning the idea, you are left with that sense of nostalgia for what you left behind, for the space around you that was not delimited. I’ve heard many of them say things like, “You know, I live here in this house and I have nothing, I mean, I have nothing else. But when I lived in a wooden house, I lived in a stilt house, anyway, around me there was food, there was forest, there was water, and all for free.”
Indeed, the forest gives you things for free
When you arrive in a city, you have nothing but those four walls you bought for two cents.
That’s why they always want to go back, but how can they? I’d like to ask you to reflect on how we, 80 or 50 years ago, left the countryside to go to the city. I think the same thing happened to our grandparents. It’s the same now, that is, those who leave the countryside or rural areas go looking for work in a big city, and then often, unfortunately, end up in a crushing mechanism. As you can see, similar situations, albeit in different contexts. And perhaps they even come from so-called ‘good’ families, so not necessarily needing to move to the city for economic reasons.
Before saying goodbye, Emanuela takes the time to get up and go to the hut’s terrace, where she shows us, through the PC camera, a large river and the forest where she lives.
These are places where the multi-award-winning Milanese biologist has decided to live, dedicating her entire life to them, both personally and professionally, thus contributing to transmitting messages of hope but also alarm for the environment.
And there is truly little time left to intervene.
