SynthesisJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2026
Bridging knowledges through fire: a systematic review of indigenous fire management practices in Brazil.
Synthesis in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite increasing attention following recent catastrophic wildfires in Brazil, research on Indigenous Fire Management remains fragmented across regions and disciplines. This study performed a systematic review, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, to integrate evidence on IFM across Brazilian biomes, practices, and governance contexts. Searches in major databases (1970-2025) yielded 605 records, of which 20 met eligibility criteria. The studies document 95 Indigenous Territories with systematic fire use, mainly in the Cerrado (52%) and Amazon (36%), followed by the Pantanal (7%) and Atlantic Forest (5%). Fire practices were categorized into five functional axes: agricultural (swidden and fallow enrichment), hunting and fruiting (patch-mosaic burning), cultural and ritual (localized low-intensity burns), prevention and territorial defense (prescribed burns, firebreaks, brigades), and ecological/restorative (control of invasive grasses and maintenance of clearings). Evidence indicates that Indigenous-managed fires enhance landscape heterogeneity, reduce fuel continuity, and significantly lower the extent and severity of uncontrolled wildfires, while strengthening food security and territorial governance. Policy analyses reveal a gradual transition from restrictive "zero-fire" policies toward adaptive co-management models led by the Prevfogo/Ibama program and recognition of Indigenous Fire Stewardship. Overall, IFM emerges as a biocultural conservation strategy that aligns ecological dynamics with traditional knowledge and governance systems, offering promising pathways for climate adaptation and ecosystem restoration. Yet, challenges persist, including unstable funding and limited operational support for Indigenous brigades outside the dry season.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.