Having been involved for some years in some of the country's largest environmental crimes, I have dealt directly with the suffering of the affected people on one side and the inefficiency of institutional powers on the other. In light of this, there arose an interest in investigating whether the use of blockchain technology can be a resilient tool to prevent new disasters or even how it could be used to manage crisis processes.
When he published his book "Risk Society" in 1986, the author Ulrick Beck warned how globalization and the process of irresponsible economic development would throw modern societies into a cycle of producing crises, collapses, and permanent destruction.
Today, more than 30 years later, we no longer even dare to speak of sustainability, given the clear perception that maintaining production and environmental degradation standards no longer makes sense; it is necessary to regenerate and reshape patterns of coexistence, consumption, and production.
In 2015, one of the world's largest mining companies, Vale S/A, caused the largest environmental crime in Brazil's history, after allowing a tailings dam to rupture, releasing over 40 million cubic meters of mud, destroying entire communities, affecting 41 cities and 3 indigenous reserves, impacting 240 hectares of Atlantic Forest, and killing the Doce River, in a sea of destruction.
It is said here that the mining company, formerly a state-owned enterprise Vale do Rio Doce, removed the Rio Doce from both the name and the map after privatization.
Investigations showed that the company was aware of the risk, the upstream dam construction method was the most dangerous in the world, and analyses conducted days before the disaster indicated the risk of rupture. There was no warning to the communities, the siren did not sound, people died, ecosystems were destroyed, and mining operations at the rupture site continued at full steam.
In 2019, four years later, Vale committed the same crime again, another dam ruptured, this time in Brumadinho, other ecosystems were destroyed, hundreds of people died, and thousands had their lives impacted.
One of the greatest references on the subject, Andrea Zhouri, defines this type of crisis as a "technological disaster," when the "catastrophe results in part or in whole from human intention, error, negligence, or involving a failure of a human system, resulting in significant damage (or injuries) or deaths."
Unfortunately, we have almost daily encounters with this type of confrontation; the risk is created, the productive and financial market prices the disaster, the damages occur, and institutional powers are incapable of creating decent structures for containment or reparation.
In this scenario, technology can be an ally, both from the perspective of containment and prevention, to avoid the occurrence of the disaster, which can be done through real-time monitoring, secure forms of control, and independent analysis mechanisms. But also, unfortunately, in a post-crisis scenario, in identifying damages, causes and effects, from the initial moment to the process of repair, regeneration, and reconstruction of the destruction caused.
As a decentralized recording technology, Blockchain can be an important tool for storing information and data, ensuring that companies carry out their economic activities, but in an environment where the government and oversight agents can identify potential risks and make necessary interventions.
The use of public and private keys can allow data to be analyzed in real-time, without necessarily impacting productive autonomy or trade/commercial secrets. The use of smart sensors, automations, and applications through oracles can be useful in identifying potential risks and allowing early action by responsible authorities, through smart contracts.
The identification and registration of the material and immaterial heritage of communities in risk areas can be both a safeguard in case of disasters and a valuable asset to prevent productive activities that endanger the rights and guarantees of peoples and traditional and local communities.
The use of smart contracts can be an important alternative in the development of repair processes, allowing the transfer of resources and investments in a more transparent, direct, and effective manner, reducing the risks of diversion and enrichment by State agents, economic agents, and other local interests. In addition to assisting legislative, judicial, and executive powers themselves in carrying out recovery projects.
These and many other applications deserve further exploration and may indicate a potential for the use of decentralized tools for crisis management, also increasing social resilience in the face of activities that endanger ecosystems, local communities, and the planet itself.
It is important to have a practical investigation that allows us to identify the potential uses of these technologies for the immediate challenges we face.