
<p><strong>Stay atop the latest research and news! The Global Nature Watch blog uses data to illuminate the state of forests and other ecosystems worldwide and tells the stories of people dedicated to protecting them. Read about deforestation, fires, sustainable agriculture, management and other topics critical to the future of the world’s lands.</strong></p>


Global Nature Watch Blog

<p><strong>Stay atop the latest research and news! The Global Nature Watch blog uses data to illuminate the state of forests and other ecosystems worldwide and tells the stories of people dedicated to protecting them. Read about deforestation, fires, sustainable agriculture, management and other topics critical to the future of the world's lands.</strong></p>

Read about data-backed topics critical to the future of forests, including rainforests, deforestation, fires, sustainable agriculture, forest monitoring and management.

Forest News, Research & Monitoring | Global Forest Watch Blog

Global Forest Watch Content

https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/gfwGlobal.png

Forest Insights

Forest Insights | Global Forest Watch Blog

amazon

amazon | Global Forest Watch Blog

commodities

commodities | Global Forest Watch Blog

soy | Global Forest Watch Blog

<p>Martina Schneider is a GIS Analyst with Global Forest Watch. She supports the GFW team in preparing data and developing content for the GFW platform and web application.</p>



<p>As a graduate student, Martina specialized in applying GIS in the fields of environmental science and natural resources management. Specifically, she studied wildfire ecology and environmental factors that contribute to risk of ignition. In addition, Martina worked at Ducks Unlimited, the world's leader in wetland and waterfowl conservation, where she was part of a team updating the National Wetlands Inventory in Minnesota.</p>



<p>Martina holds an M.S. in Geographic Information Systems from Eastern Michigan University and a B.S. in Geography from Texas A&amp;M University.</p>



<p>She lives in Baltimore, MD with her husband and dog.</p>

Martina Schneider

Liz Goldman

Mikaela Weisse

Luiz Amaral

<p>As a Strategic Solutions &amp; Engagement Specialist for Latin America, Luiz works with the Global Forest Watch team to expand GFW´s uptake and impact across the region. Luiz supports the GFW team on the development of strategic business positioning with stakeholders from the private food and agriculture sector, governments, civil society organizations and other institutions.</p>



<p>Luiz has an extensive background in agricultural engineering and has worked in the Brazilian farming sector for 18 years. He focused on agricultural production systems in his early career, spending nine years working in sugar cane mills within the country´s northeast and southeast regions. Besides leading the agricultural activities, Luiz partnered with research institutions to promote innovative technologies and working practices to optimize agricultural productivity while also improving energy efficiency and reducing GHG emissions.</p>



<p>Prior to joining WRI, Luiz spent nine years as a Strategic Customer Manager in a multinational company where he managed distinct roles in the sales, environmental processes, safety and business development initiatives. Additionally, Luiz collaborated to build a cross-functional strategy for the company, designed to find synergies within different inner divisions such as crop-protection, sustainable solutions, industrial biosciences and safety, intended to foster lasting relationships with key agri-industrial clients.</p>



<p>Luiz holds a bachelor’s degree from University of São Paulo (ESALQ-USP), an MBA in Business Management from Fundação Getúlio Vargas (FGV), and an MSc in Sustainable Resources: Economics, Policy and Transitions from University College London (UCL). While at the UK, he also earned a Postgraduate Certificate in Sustainable Business, from University of Cambridge.</p>

Luiz Calado

<aside id="textbox"> <div><em>Tree cover loss does not always <a href="https://research.wri.org/gfr/data-methods" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">equal deforestation</a>, as it is difficult to know whether the clearing will result in a permanent land use change. However, pairing the loss data with annual soy data allows us to confirm the land use change permanence and gets us closer to understanding true deforestation patterns. We refer to these changes as “forests replaced by soy”. There is also some disagreement about how well the tree cover loss data captures forests in some biomes. For example, in the Atlantic Forest biome in Brazil, the large presence of tree plantations in the same area as soy results in an overestimation of the area of forest replaced by soy. While in other regions without natural occurring trees, such as Pampas, results are underestimated. However, loss still indicates annual change trends and the level of threat experienced by these important ecosystems. GFW frequently reports on humid primary forest loss, however this analysis reports all tree cover loss to include the Chaco and Cerrado biomes as they are important habitats and soy growing regions in South America that are outside the humid tropics. Official Brazilian government deforestation data (PRODES) was not used as it did not allow for cross country comparisons. The statistics presented here represent tree cover that was eventually replaced by soy production areas regardless of whether it happened legally or illegally.</em></div> </aside>



<p>As global food demand increases so too does the potential destruction of natural ecosystems to accommodate growing commodity production. Understanding deforestation related to agriculture is essential to developing strategies that solve these challenges. Recent research from World Resources Institute shows that <a href="https://research.wri.org/gfr/forest-extent-indicators/deforestation-agriculture" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">8.2 million hectares</a> of forest were replaced by soy between 2001-2015 globally, of which 7.9 million hectares of conversion occurred in South America. Soy is also grown in large quantities in the United States, China and India, but in South America production is expanding into forests, threatening important ecosystems.</p>



<p><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-021-00729-z" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">New data</a> from Texas Tech University and University of Maryland, <a href="https://gfw.global/2ZObmQM" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">available on GFW and GFW Pro</a>, enables anyone to see the extent of soy production within South America at a 30×30-meter resolution, per harvest year, from 2000 onward. To better understand the trends of soy production on the continent’s forests, we combined the new data with annual tree cover loss data and focused only on yearly soy expansion– new areas of soy planted per year from 2001 onward.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Annual tree cover loss within soy production areas" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GFW-Soy-blog-v4_Figure-1-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>The dynamics of soy replacing forests in South America are complex because soy is often planted several years after tree cover is initially cleared. During the interim period land can be used for other purposes, typically pasture for grazing cattle. We classify the impacts of soy production as follows:</p>



<ul><li>Soy can have a direct impact on forests when land is cleared and immediately converted to soy production. We consider any forest loss that occurred three years before soy establishment as immediate conversion.</li><li>Soy can have a delayed impact when forests are cleared and used for other purposes for several years (three or more years for our analysis) prior to soy establishment. <a href="https://research.wri.org/gfr/forest-extent-indicators/deforestation-agriculture" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Our previous analysis</a> shows that between 2001-2015 in South America, soy directly converted 3.9 million hectares of forest and had a delayed impact on the remaining 4.0 million hectares.</li><li>Just like any other crop, soy could also be a driver of indirect land displacement. As the area of available land is finite, land use change in one area could be indirectly linked to land use changes elsewhere. Our analysis cannot quantify the impact of indirect land displacement.</li></ul>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Soy Expansion Threatens Ecosystems Beyond the Brazilian Amazon</h2>



<p>Historically, expansion of soy production in the Brazilian Amazon has faced intense public scrutiny, prompting action by both public and private sector actors. For example, <a href="https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Policy-Brief-Part-I-How-to-Navigate-the-Complexity.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Brazil’s Forest Code</a> directs farmers in the Amazon to set aside 80% of their property as a forest reserve, and under the <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2020/12/soy-moratorium-averted-new-jersey-size-loss-of-amazon-rainforest-study/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Soy Moratorium</a>, traders agreed not to purchase soy grown on land cleared after 2008. However, in 2019 just 14% of all expansion across South America occurred in the Amazon. Our analysis shows that soy expansion has also impacted other important ecosystems that have received less attention.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed" data-src="story/1046368?163031"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" width="100%">Each box outlined in black denotes the total soy expansion in each region in 2019. Gray is new soy expansion in areas that weren’t forested in 2000, yellow represents direct forest conversion (less than three years between conversion and soy expansion) and blue represents delayed use of cleared forest land for soy (up to 20 years between conversion and soy expansion.</div>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">In Brazil Forest Area Replaced by Soy in the Cerrado is Comparable to the Amazon</h2>



<p>Situated south of the Amazon, the <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/nt0704" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Cerrado is the most biodiverse savanna ecosystem in the world</a>. Land use planning and scientific advancements during the 1980s and 1990s transformed the Cerrado into an agricultural powerhouse for soy, cattle, and other commodities at the expense of millions of hectares of forests and native vegetation. Over the last 20 years the extent of soy production in this biome has more than doubled, and in 2019 a third of the entire South American soy planted area was located in the Cerrado.</p>



<p>Environmental protections in the Cerrado are <a href="https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Policy-Brief-Part-I-How-to-Navigate-the-Complexity.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">less strict than in the Amazon</a>, and both biomes have experienced comparable total forest area replaced by soy over the last 20 years. Furthermore, the amount of direct forest conversion to soy in the Cerrado is almost twice as high as the Amazon, where large quantities of soy are still being planted on land where forest was cleared more than 15 years ago.</p>



<p>Rates of direct annual conversion have trended downward over the last several years, but delayed conversion has been relatively stable. Even if not a direct attribution, such delayed effect is relevant as studies have <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab003a" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">demonstrated</a> that expectations of future increase in land’s value, which occurs when an area is converted to agriculture, have impacts on decisions to deforest. Even if soy does not occupy the land right after it is deforested, the expectation that it could do so in the future can also be considered a driver of deforestation.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GFW-Soy-blog_Graphic-3-2.png" width="100%">Each column represents the total area of soy expansion in each harvest year. Yellow represents the proportion of that yearly expansion taking place in areas recently deforested and blue in areas that were forested more than three years before soy expansion happened.</div>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Direct&nbsp;Conversion of&nbsp;Forests to&nbsp;Soy&nbsp;is&nbsp;Decreasing in Argentina, but&nbsp;Not&nbsp;Fast&nbsp;Enough</h2>



<p>Only a very small share of soy production in Argentina has come at the expense of forests as the crop is primarily grown in the Pampas grasslands. However, due to the considerable extent of land area occupied by soy across the country, Argentina is still second to Brazil in terms of total forest area replaced by soy. Soy primarily replaced forests in the northwestern portion of the country, where soy expansion threatens forests and other native vegetation in the <a href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146731/deforestation-in-argentinas-gran-chaco" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Gran Chaco</a>. This highly biodiverse ecosystem is the largest dry forest in South America and a prominent frontier of agricultural expansion.</p>



<p>During the last ten years in Argentina the extent of forest area replaced by soy per year has more than halved, and during the same time period the area of direct conversion of forests to soy also plummeted, falling from 87,000 to 12,000 hectares in 2019. However, the declining rate of direct forest conversion has not kept pace with the declining area of overall soy expansion, which has fallen at a much faster rate.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Rate of Argentinian soy expansion is falling faster than rate of direct conversion of forests to soy" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GFW-Soy-blog-v4_Figure-4-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Soy&nbsp;Production&nbsp;in Paraguay&nbsp;Remains Concentrated&nbsp;in the Atlantic Forest</h2>



<p>Paraguay is home to two key forested ecosystems: the Chaco in the west and the Atlantic Forest in the east. The Atlantic Forest is one of the most diverse ecosystems on the planet and one of the most endangered as current forest cover is only a <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2015/12/photo-essay-paraguays-last-remaining-remnant-of-intact-atlantic-forest/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">fraction of what it once was</a>. This biome is where soy expansion has primarily replaced forests, and our analysis shows that direct conversion of forests to soy in this biome has trended downward over the last several years, falling from a peak of 22,000 hectares in 2013 to 5,000 hectares in 2019. However, the Atlantic Forest in Paraguay is protected by a Zero Deforestation Law, passed in 2004 in response to high rates of deforestation in the early 2000s. Direct conversion of forests to soy should not be taking place in this biome at all and are, by definition, illegal.</p>



<p>As available land in the east shrinks, concerns about agriculture creeping into the Chaco have grown. However, our analysis found that while the area of planted soy in western Paraguay has increased over the last 20 years, overall soy production in Paraguay remains concentrated in the east, accounting for approximately 98% of all soy planted across the country in 2019. Likewise, forest area replaced by soy is concentrated in eastern Paraguay, and in 2019, 86% of forest replaced by soy in Paraguay was located in this region of the country. Soy cannot yet be considered a significant direct driver of deforestation in the Paraguayan Chaco, and conversion of forests is mainly linked to other commodities.</p>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Soy&nbsp;Replacing&nbsp;Forest&nbsp;in&nbsp;Bolivia&nbsp;Creates a&nbsp;New&nbsp;Hotspot of&nbsp;Deforestation</h2>



<p>Although Bolivia produces&nbsp;far&nbsp;less soy than its neighbors, the expansion&nbsp;of soy production&nbsp;is largely occurring at the expense of forests. In 2019,&nbsp;soy&nbsp;replaced&nbsp;49,000 hectares of forest, accounting for 80% of the entire&nbsp;soy&nbsp;expansion&nbsp;area&nbsp;in the country. Direct pressure on forests is high as well, and during the same year,&nbsp;soy directly&nbsp;converted&nbsp;22,000 hectares of&nbsp;forest.&nbsp;This area is comparable to other regions where&nbsp;the overall extent of&nbsp;soy&nbsp;expansion is much higher.&nbsp;For&nbsp;comparison,&nbsp;in 2019, 29,000 hectares of forest in the Brazilian Amazon was&nbsp;directly&nbsp;converted for soy expansion and&nbsp;in&nbsp;the&nbsp;Cerrado&nbsp;40,000 hectares of forest was converted.</p>



<p>In 2020 the country was among <a href="https://research.wri.org/gfr/top-ten-lists" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">the top ten countries for humid tropical primary forest loss</a>. Soy is largely replacing forests in the Chiquitano Dry Forests, a <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/nt0212" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">unique transitionary biome</a> situated between the Amazon and drier forests of the Chaco. If nothing changes, it’s likely that deforestation will continue to increase, placing all three biomes at risk.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Direct conversion in 2019 harvest year is comparable between Bolivia, the Amazon and the Cerrado" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GFW-Soy-blog-v4_Figure-5-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Sustainable&nbsp;Soy&nbsp;Production&nbsp;Will&nbsp;Require&nbsp;a&nbsp;Holistic&nbsp;Approach</h2>



<p>Focusing sustainability efforts on a single commodity does not fully address the challenges of deforestation in South America, and the indirect impact of soy on forests may be larger than what our analysis shows because of its links to other commodities. Soy often replaces pasture because cattle grazing is typically the activity that first occupies land once forests are cleared. Between 2000 and 2015, 45.1 million hectares of forest was replaced by pasture globally, over five times that of soy. Soy is also an important source of animal feed, primarily for poultry and pork, as well as also aquaculture. Further, the value of forests areas, pasture areas and cropland changes over time, meaning that the expectation of land value increases with crop expansion is a key driver of deforestation as well.</p>



<p>As global demand for soy and other commodities rises, pressures for bringing more land into production will also continue. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-020-00194-5" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Numerous studies</a> have confirmed that the Soy Moratorium has played a key role in reducing forest conversion to soy in the Amazon, but a prominent criticism is that it could potentially drive forest conversion to soy in other ecosystems. Likewise, Paraguay’s Deforestation Moratorium only applies to the Atlantic Forest, and, although our analysis shows that soy production in the country is concentrated in this biome, the Chaco is still a vulnerable agricultural frontier. If only the Brazilian Amazon or Paraguay’s Atlantic Forest are off limits, there is additional pressure placed on forests and other natural ecosystems.</p>



<p>There are&nbsp;several&nbsp;mechanisms that can help&nbsp;achieve sustainable production goals. Governments can tackle direct risk of land conversion by implementing&nbsp;and enforcing&nbsp;laws. Both governments and companies&nbsp;need&nbsp;to&nbsp;send clear&nbsp;policy and&nbsp;market signals&nbsp;to&nbsp;help end the perversive cycle of land price speculation&nbsp;and land grabbing.&nbsp;In addition, corporations should adhere to due-diligence practices when procuring suppliers (both direct and indirect)&nbsp;and&nbsp;transparently demonstrate&nbsp;progress over time. Finally, efforts to boost&nbsp;productivity&nbsp;of&nbsp;soy and other commodities on existing agricultural land should be&nbsp;emphasized,&nbsp;while&nbsp;also&nbsp;linked with ecosystem protection measures and investments in new technologies.&nbsp;These strategies will help meet growing global food demand and ensure economic growth in South America while preserving its forests and natural resources.&nbsp;</p>



<style type="text/css"></style>

The Commodity Report: Soy Production’s Impact on Forests in South America

<aside id="textbox"> <div><em>Tree cover loss does not always <a href="https://research.wri.org/gfr/data-methods" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">equal deforestation</a>, as it is difficult to know whether the clearing will result in a permanent land use change. However, pairing the loss data with annual soy data allows us to confirm the land use change permanence and gets us closer to understanding true deforestation patterns. We refer to these changes as “forests replaced by soy”. There is also some disagreement about how well the tree cover loss data captures forests in some biomes. For example, in the Atlantic Forest biome in Brazil, the large presence of tree plantations in the same area as soy results in an overestimation of the area of forest replaced by soy. While in other regions without natural occurring trees, such as Pampas, results are underestimated. However, loss still indicates annual change trends and the level of threat experienced by these important ecosystems. GFW frequently reports on humid primary forest loss, however this analysis reports all tree cover loss to include the Chaco and Cerrado biomes as they are important habitats and soy growing regions in South America that are outside the humid tropics. Official Brazilian government deforestation data (PRODES) was not used as it did not allow for cross country comparisons. The statistics presented here represent tree cover that was eventually replaced by soy production areas regardless of whether it happened legally or illegally.</em></div> </aside>



<p>As global food demand increases so too does the potential destruction of natural ecosystems to accommodate growing commodity production. Understanding deforestation related to agriculture is essential to developing strategies that solve these challenges. Recent research from World Resources Institute shows that <a href="https://research.wri.org/gfr/forest-extent-indicators/deforestation-agriculture" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">8.2 million hectares</a> of forest were replaced by soy between 2001-2015 globally, of which 7.9 million hectares of conversion occurred in South America. Soy is also grown in large quantities in the United States, China and India, but in South America production is expanding into forests, threatening important ecosystems.</p>



<p><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-021-00729-z" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">New data</a> from Texas Tech University and University of Maryland, <a href="https://gfw.global/2ZObmQM" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">available on GFW and GFW Pro</a>, enables anyone to see the extent of soy production within South America at a 30x30-meter resolution, per harvest year, from 2000 onward. To better understand the trends of soy production on the continent’s forests, we combined the new data with annual tree cover loss data and focused only on yearly soy expansion– new areas of soy planted per year from 2001 onward.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Annual tree cover loss within soy production areas" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GFW-Soy-blog-v4_Figure-1-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<p>The dynamics of soy replacing forests in South America are complex because soy is often planted several years after tree cover is initially cleared. During the interim period land can be used for other purposes, typically pasture for grazing cattle. We classify the impacts of soy production as follows:</p>



<ul><li>Soy can have a direct impact on forests when land is cleared and immediately converted to soy production. We consider any forest loss that occurred three years before soy establishment as immediate conversion.</li><li>Soy can have a delayed impact when forests are cleared and used for other purposes for several years (three or more years for our analysis) prior to soy establishment. <a href="https://research.wri.org/gfr/forest-extent-indicators/deforestation-agriculture" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Our previous analysis</a> shows that between 2001-2015 in South America, soy directly converted 3.9 million hectares of forest and had a delayed impact on the remaining 4.0 million hectares.</li><li>Just like any other crop, soy could also be a driver of indirect land displacement. As the area of available land is finite, land use change in one area could be indirectly linked to land use changes elsewhere. Our analysis cannot quantify the impact of indirect land displacement.</li></ul>



<h2>Soy Expansion Threatens Ecosystems Beyond the Brazilian Amazon</h2>



<p>Historically, expansion of soy production in the Brazilian Amazon has faced intense public scrutiny, prompting action by both public and private sector actors. For example, <a href="https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Policy-Brief-Part-I-How-to-Navigate-the-Complexity.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Brazil’s Forest Code</a> directs farmers in the Amazon to set aside 80% of their property as a forest reserve, and under the <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2020/12/soy-moratorium-averted-new-jersey-size-loss-of-amazon-rainforest-study/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Soy Moratorium</a>, traders agreed not to purchase soy grown on land cleared after 2008. However, in 2019 just 14% of all expansion across South America occurred in the Amazon. Our analysis shows that soy expansion has also impacted other important ecosystems that have received less attention.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed" data-src="story/1046368?163031"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" width="100%">Each box outlined in black denotes the total soy expansion in each region in 2019. Gray is new soy expansion in areas that weren’t forested in 2000, yellow represents direct forest conversion (less than three years between conversion and soy expansion) and blue represents delayed use of cleared forest land for soy (up to 20 years between conversion and soy expansion.</div>



<h2>In Brazil Forest Area Replaced by Soy in the Cerrado is Comparable to the Amazon</h2>



<p>Situated south of the Amazon, the <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/nt0704" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Cerrado is the most biodiverse savanna ecosystem in the world</a>. Land use planning and scientific advancements during the 1980s and 1990s transformed the Cerrado into an agricultural powerhouse for soy, cattle, and other commodities at the expense of millions of hectares of forests and native vegetation. Over the last 20 years the extent of soy production in this biome has more than doubled, and in 2019 a third of the entire South American soy planted area was located in the Cerrado.</p>



<p>Environmental protections in the Cerrado are <a href="https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Policy-Brief-Part-I-How-to-Navigate-the-Complexity.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">less strict than in the Amazon</a>, and both biomes have experienced comparable total forest area replaced by soy over the last 20 years. Furthermore, the amount of direct forest conversion to soy in the Cerrado is almost twice as high as the Amazon, where large quantities of soy are still being planted on land where forest was cleared more than 15 years ago.</p>



<p>Rates of direct annual conversion have trended downward over the last several years, but delayed conversion has been relatively stable. Even if not a direct attribution, such delayed effect is relevant as studies have <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab003a" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">demonstrated</a> that expectations of future increase in land’s value, which occurs when an area is converted to agriculture, have impacts on decisions to deforest. Even if soy does not occupy the land right after it is deforested, the expectation that it could do so in the future can also be considered a driver of deforestation.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GFW-Soy-blog_Graphic-3-2.png" width="100%">Each column represents the total area of soy expansion in each harvest year. Yellow represents the proportion of that yearly expansion taking place in areas recently deforested and blue in areas that were forested more than three years before soy expansion happened.</div>



<h2>Direct&nbsp;Conversion of&nbsp;Forests to&nbsp;Soy&nbsp;is&nbsp;Decreasing in Argentina, but&nbsp;Not&nbsp;Fast&nbsp;Enough</h2>



<p>Only a very small share of soy production in Argentina has come at the expense of forests as the crop is primarily grown in the Pampas grasslands. However, due to the considerable extent of land area occupied by soy across the country, Argentina is still second to Brazil in terms of total forest area replaced by soy. Soy primarily replaced forests in the northwestern portion of the country, where soy expansion threatens forests and other native vegetation in the <a href="https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146731/deforestation-in-argentinas-gran-chaco" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Gran Chaco</a>. This highly biodiverse ecosystem is the largest dry forest in South America and a prominent frontier of agricultural expansion.</p>



<p>During the last ten years in Argentina the extent of forest area replaced by soy per year has more than halved, and during the same time period the area of direct conversion of forests to soy also plummeted, falling from 87,000 to 12,000 hectares in 2019. However, the declining rate of direct forest conversion has not kept pace with the declining area of overall soy expansion, which has fallen at a much faster rate.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Rate of Argentinian soy expansion is falling faster than rate of direct conversion of forests to soy" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GFW-Soy-blog-v4_Figure-4-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<h2>Soy&nbsp;Production&nbsp;in Paraguay&nbsp;Remains Concentrated&nbsp;in the Atlantic Forest</h2>



<p>Paraguay is home to two key forested ecosystems: the Chaco in the west and the Atlantic Forest in the east. The Atlantic Forest is one of the most diverse ecosystems on the planet and one of the most endangered as current forest cover is only a <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2015/12/photo-essay-paraguays-last-remaining-remnant-of-intact-atlantic-forest/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">fraction of what it once was</a>. This biome is where soy expansion has primarily replaced forests, and our analysis shows that direct conversion of forests to soy in this biome has trended downward over the last several years, falling from a peak of 22,000 hectares in 2013 to 5,000 hectares in 2019. However, the Atlantic Forest in Paraguay is protected by a Zero Deforestation Law, passed in 2004 in response to high rates of deforestation in the early 2000s. Direct conversion of forests to soy should not be taking place in this biome at all and are, by definition, illegal.</p>



<p>As available land in the east shrinks, concerns about agriculture creeping into the Chaco have grown. However, our analysis found that while the area of planted soy in western Paraguay has increased over the last 20 years, overall soy production in Paraguay remains concentrated in the east, accounting for approximately 98% of all soy planted across the country in 2019. Likewise, forest area replaced by soy is concentrated in eastern Paraguay, and in 2019, 86% of forest replaced by soy in Paraguay was located in this region of the country. Soy cannot yet be considered a significant direct driver of deforestation in the Paraguayan Chaco, and conversion of forests is mainly linked to other commodities.</p>



<h2>Soy&nbsp;Replacing&nbsp;Forest&nbsp;in&nbsp;Bolivia&nbsp;Creates a&nbsp;New&nbsp;Hotspot of&nbsp;Deforestation</h2>



<p>Although Bolivia produces&nbsp;far&nbsp;less soy than its neighbors, the expansion&nbsp;of soy production&nbsp;is largely occurring at the expense of forests. In 2019,&nbsp;soy&nbsp;replaced&nbsp;49,000 hectares of forest, accounting for 80% of the entire&nbsp;soy&nbsp;expansion&nbsp;area&nbsp;in the country. Direct pressure on forests is high as well, and during the same year,&nbsp;soy directly&nbsp;converted&nbsp;22,000 hectares of&nbsp;forest.&nbsp;This area is comparable to other regions where&nbsp;the overall extent of&nbsp;soy&nbsp;expansion is much higher.&nbsp;For&nbsp;comparison,&nbsp;in 2019, 29,000 hectares of forest in the Brazilian Amazon was&nbsp;directly&nbsp;converted for soy expansion and&nbsp;in&nbsp;the&nbsp;Cerrado&nbsp;40,000 hectares of forest was converted.</p>



<p>In 2020 the country was among <a href="https://research.wri.org/gfr/top-ten-lists" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">the top ten countries for humid tropical primary forest loss</a>. Soy is largely replacing forests in the Chiquitano Dry Forests, a <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/nt0212" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">unique transitionary biome</a> situated between the Amazon and drier forests of the Chaco. If nothing changes, it’s likely that deforestation will continue to increase, placing all three biomes at risk.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="Direct conversion in 2019 harvest year is comparable between Bolivia, the Amazon and the Cerrado" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/GFW-Soy-blog-v4_Figure-5-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<h2>Sustainable&nbsp;Soy&nbsp;Production&nbsp;Will&nbsp;Require&nbsp;a&nbsp;Holistic&nbsp;Approach</h2>



<p>Focusing sustainability efforts on a single commodity does not fully address the challenges of deforestation in South America, and the indirect impact of soy on forests may be larger than what our analysis shows because of its links to other commodities. Soy often replaces pasture because cattle grazing is typically the activity that first occupies land once forests are cleared. Between 2000 and 2015, 45.1 million hectares of forest was replaced by pasture globally, over five times that of soy. Soy is also an important source of animal feed, primarily for poultry and pork, as well as also aquaculture. Further, the value of forests areas, pasture areas and cropland changes over time, meaning that the expectation of land value increases with crop expansion is a key driver of deforestation as well.</p>



<p>As global demand for soy and other commodities rises, pressures for bringing more land into production will also continue. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-020-00194-5" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Numerous studies</a> have confirmed that the Soy Moratorium has played a key role in reducing forest conversion to soy in the Amazon, but a prominent criticism is that it could potentially drive forest conversion to soy in other ecosystems. Likewise, Paraguay’s Deforestation Moratorium only applies to the Atlantic Forest, and, although our analysis shows that soy production in the country is concentrated in this biome, the Chaco is still a vulnerable agricultural frontier. If only the Brazilian Amazon or Paraguay’s Atlantic Forest are off limits, there is additional pressure placed on forests and other natural ecosystems.</p>



<p>There are&nbsp;several&nbsp;mechanisms that can help&nbsp;achieve sustainable production goals. Governments can tackle direct risk of land conversion by implementing&nbsp;and enforcing&nbsp;laws. Both governments and companies&nbsp;need&nbsp;to&nbsp;send clear&nbsp;policy and&nbsp;market signals&nbsp;to&nbsp;help end the perversive cycle of land price speculation&nbsp;and land grabbing.&nbsp;In addition, corporations should adhere to due-diligence practices when procuring suppliers (both direct and indirect)&nbsp;and&nbsp;transparently demonstrate&nbsp;progress over time. Finally, efforts to boost&nbsp;productivity&nbsp;of&nbsp;soy and other commodities on existing agricultural land should be&nbsp;emphasized,&nbsp;while&nbsp;also&nbsp;linked with ecosystem protection measures and investments in new technologies.&nbsp;These strategies will help meet growing global food demand and ensure economic growth in South America while preserving its forests and natural resources.&nbsp;</p>



<style type="text/css"></style>

The combination of new data on soy production with annual tree cover loss shows sustainable soy production will require a holistic approach

Soy Production’s Impact on Forests in South America | GFW Blog

Comment

https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/9be466a38cf8a59795eb5c3ed715baa9?s=96&d=mm&r=g

Amanda Dimartini

cattle

cattle | Global Forest Watch Blog

palm oil

palm oil | Global Forest Watch Blog

<p>New analysis shows that just seven agricultural commodities — cattle, oil palm, soy, cocoa, rubber, coffee and plantation wood fiber — accounted for 26% of global tree cover loss&nbsp;from 2001 to 2015. These agricultural commodities replaced 71.9 million hectares of forest during that period, an area of land more than twice the size of Germany.</p>



<p>The results, now available on WRI’s&nbsp;<a href="http://bit.ly/2OeI07L" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Global Forest Review</a>, underscore the outsized role a handful of commodities play in global deforestation.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="deforestation caused by cattle and other agricultural commodities" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/21_01_22-GFW-Commodity-Blog-v2_Formatted-for-Insights-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">What is Agriculture’s Role in Deforestation?</h3>



<p>As demand for food and other resources&nbsp;<a href="https://research.wri.org/wrr-food" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">continues to grow</a>, forests are often cleared to make way for new fields and plantations. Scientists&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature10452" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">estimate</a>&nbsp;that over a quarter of tropical forests and just under half of temperate forests have been converted to production in human history.</p>



<p>Today, the majority of tree cover loss associated with the expansion of farms and plantations happens&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/02/agriculture-drove-recent-record-breaking-tree-cover-loss" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">in the tropics</a>, a troubling trend considering the vast&nbsp;<a href="http://bit.ly/3jxyKre" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">carbon stocks</a>&nbsp;and biodiversity held in rainforests. While we have a general understanding of where agribusiness has replaced forests, until now the world lacked information about the impact of specific products.</p>



<p>Our analysis compares the current extent of seven commodities with annual tree cover loss data from 2001 to 2015 to map where each commodity replaced forests over that time span.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Cattle Ranching Replaced More Forests than Any Other Commodity</h3>



<p>Of the seven agricultural commodities, cattle pasture replaced the most forest by far — 45.1 million hectares, or an area of land the size of Sweden. Cattle are responsible for 16% of total tree cover loss.</p>



<p>Oil palm is a distant second, replacing 10.5 million hectares from 2001 to 2015, while soy accounted for 7.9 million hectares.</p>



<p>Cocoa, plantation rubber, plantation wood fiber and coffee each replaced around 2 million hectares of forest from 2001 to 2015, though the analyses for rubber and wood fiber cover only a subset of countries because of data availability.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Oil palm replaced forests mostly in Indonesia and Malaysia, while soy replaced forests mainly in South American countries like Brazil and Argentina. The conversion of forests to cattle pasture was more widely distributed across the globe, but hotspots exist in South and Central America.</p>



<p>Cocoa, rubber, wood fiber and coffee played a big role in replacing forests in some countries, despite their smaller global impacts. In Ghana, for example, conversion of forests to cocoa represents a third of the country’s total tree cover loss.</p>



<p>The seven commodities analyzed represent 57% of agriculture-related tree cover loss from 2001-2015.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed" data-src="story/730789"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Soy and Oil Palm Replaced Less Forests in Recent Years</h3>



<p>The analysis also helps identify areas where deforestation rates are coming down. In recent years, soy and oil palm, the commodities most notorious for deforestation, replaced less forests than they have historically.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3647614"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3647542"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>The rate at which oil palm plantations replaced forests dropped sharply after 2012.&nbsp;<a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.12622" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Other</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaf6db" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">studies</a>&nbsp;attributed this to drops in palm oil prices, national policies intended to curb forest clearing and corporate zero-deforestation commitments. Although the study period ends in 2015, Indonesia — the country accounting for two-thirds of forests replaced by oil palm — saw&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/06/global-tree-cover-loss-data-2019" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">three consecutive years</a>&nbsp;of reductions in primary forest loss from 2017-2019.</p>



<p>The rate at which soy replaced forests dropped dramatically after a spike in 2004. As with oil palm, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/109/4/1341" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">drop coincided</a>&nbsp;with lower prices, new national policies and deforestation-free supply chain initiatives. Since then, the rate at which soy replaced forests rebounded in Brazil’s Cerrado through 2012, but then declined slightly&nbsp;from 2013-2015. With primary forest loss increasing since 2015&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/06/global-tree-cover-loss-data-2019" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">in Brazil</a>, the country where soy has replaced the most forest, it remains to be seen whether those declines will continue.</p>



<p>Although data on plantation wood fiber and rubber is more limited than other commodities, the analysis also shows some recent declines in the rate at which such plantations replaced forests. These correspond with a decline in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/commodity-markets" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">prices for rubber</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://asiapulppaper.com/-/paper-mills" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">zero-deforestation commitments</a>&nbsp;for most large wood fiber companies.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Cattle, Cocoa and Coffee Continue to Overtake Forests</h3>



<p>We did not see any noticeable changes in the rate at which cattle pasture replaced forests since 2001, despite a number of <a href="https://insights.trase.earth/yearbook/contexts/brazilian-beef" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">zero-deforestation</a> <a href="https://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/blog/implementing-and-scaling-up-the-cgf-zero-net-deforestation-commitment/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">commitments</a>. Deforestation from cattle is much harder to tackle from within <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-12-17/saving-the-amazon-starts-with-cleaning-up-the-beef-industry" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">supply chains</a>, because pasture expansion happens in some places despite very low or even negative&nbsp;<a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/26268895?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">profit margins</a>. In those cases, landholders may convert forests to pasture as a form of&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320713004394?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">land speculation</a>, to secure&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264837716000193?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">land tenure</a>, or for&nbsp;<a href="https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10088017" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">social and cultural reasons</a>&nbsp;rather than for profit.</p>



<p>Beef consumption also tends to be more domestic; only around&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/brazil-livestock-and-products-annual-7" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">a quarter</a>&nbsp;of beef produced in Brazil is exported. This makes beef supply chains less responsive to international pressure around reducing deforestation.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3655447"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>Other agricultural commodities showing limited progress in reducing deforestation are cocoa and coffee, though detailed maps of cocoa and coffee are difficult to produce, as these commodities are often grown under canopy cover and are hard to see in satellite imagery. We’ve seen fluctuations in recent years in the rates of primary forest loss in the big cocoa-producing countries of Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire. Better data sets on the footprint of cocoa production could greatly improve our understanding of how much those fluctuations are related to cocoa.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Untangling Commodities’ Impacts on Forests</h3>



<p>We are still a long way from fully understanding the complex dynamics between agricultural commodity production and deforestation. For example, the analysis can’t prove that land was deforested&nbsp;<em>because</em>&nbsp;of any one crop, only that the crop was planted in an area that was deforested. We also aren’t able to account for the indirect impacts that commodities may have on each other and the world’s forests, such as when the expansion of one crop displaces another into forests or drives up land values.</p>



<p>However, this analysis represents an important step towards understanding the impact of agricultural commodities on forests, giving us a starting point to estimate trends and map direct impacts. Detailed maps of where each commodity has replaced forests will better inform research as we continue to tease out these complex interactions, and help us evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to slow commodity-driven deforestation.</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”=""> 
 

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2021/02/global-deforestation-agricultural-commodities" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 


 

</div> 

 

<hr>



<style type="text/css"></style>

Just 7 Commodities Replaced an Area of Forest Twice the Size of Germany from 2001-2015

<p>New analysis shows that just seven agricultural commodities — cattle, oil palm, soy, cocoa, rubber, coffee and plantation wood fiber — accounted for 26% of global tree cover loss&nbsp;from 2001 to 2015. These agricultural commodities replaced 71.9 million hectares of forest during that period, an area of land more than twice the size of Germany.</p>



<p>The results, now available on WRI's&nbsp;<a href="http://bit.ly/2OeI07L" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Global Forest Review</a>, underscore the outsized role a handful of commodities play in global deforestation.</p>



<div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="deforestation caused by cattle and other agricultural commodities" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/21_01_22-GFW-Commodity-Blog-v2_Formatted-for-Insights-1.png" width="100%"></div>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">What is Agriculture's Role in Deforestation?</h3>



<p>As demand for food and other resources&nbsp;<a href="https://research.wri.org/wrr-food" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">continues to grow</a>, forests are often cleared to make way for new fields and plantations. Scientists&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature10452" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">estimate</a>&nbsp;that over a quarter of tropical forests and just under half of temperate forests have been converted to production in human history.</p>



<p>Today, the majority of tree cover loss associated with the expansion of farms and plantations happens&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/02/agriculture-drove-recent-record-breaking-tree-cover-loss" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">in the tropics</a>, a troubling trend considering the vast&nbsp;<a href="http://bit.ly/3jxyKre" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">carbon stocks</a>&nbsp;and biodiversity held in rainforests. While we have a general understanding of where agribusiness has replaced forests, until now the world lacked information about the impact of specific products.</p>



<p>Our analysis compares the current extent of seven commodities with annual tree cover loss data from 2001 to 2015 to map where each commodity replaced forests over that time span.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Cattle Ranching Replaced More Forests than Any Other Commodity</h3>



<p>Of the seven agricultural commodities, cattle pasture replaced the most forest by far — 45.1 million hectares, or an area of land the size of Sweden. Cattle are responsible for 16% of total tree cover loss.</p>



<p>Oil palm is a distant second, replacing 10.5 million hectares from 2001 to 2015, while soy accounted for 7.9 million hectares.</p>



<p>Cocoa, plantation rubber, plantation wood fiber and coffee each replaced around 2 million hectares of forest from 2001 to 2015, though the analyses for rubber and wood fiber cover only a subset of countries because of data availability.&nbsp;</p>



<p>Oil palm replaced forests mostly in Indonesia and Malaysia, while soy replaced forests mainly in South American countries like Brazil and Argentina. The conversion of forests to cattle pasture was more widely distributed across the globe, but hotspots exist in South and Central America.</p>



<p>Cocoa, rubber, wood fiber and coffee played a big role in replacing forests in some countries, despite their smaller global impacts. In Ghana, for example, conversion of forests to cocoa represents a third of the country’s total tree cover loss.</p>



<p>The seven commodities analyzed represent 57% of agriculture-related tree cover loss from 2001-2015.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed" data-src="story/730789"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Soy and Oil Palm Replaced Less Forests in Recent Years</h3>



<p>The analysis also helps identify areas where deforestation rates are coming down. In recent years, soy and oil palm, the commodities most notorious for deforestation, replaced less forests than they have historically.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3647614"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3647542"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>The rate at which oil palm plantations replaced forests dropped sharply after 2012.&nbsp;<a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.12622" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Other</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaf6db" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">studies</a>&nbsp;attributed this to drops in palm oil prices, national policies intended to curb forest clearing and corporate zero-deforestation commitments. Although the study period ends in 2015, Indonesia — the country accounting for two-thirds of forests replaced by oil palm — saw&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/06/global-tree-cover-loss-data-2019" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">three consecutive years</a>&nbsp;of reductions in primary forest loss from 2017-2019.</p>



<p>The rate at which soy replaced forests dropped dramatically after a spike in 2004. As with oil palm, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/109/4/1341" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">drop coincided</a>&nbsp;with lower prices, new national policies and deforestation-free supply chain initiatives. Since then, the rate at which soy replaced forests rebounded in Brazil’s Cerrado through 2012, but then declined slightly&nbsp;from 2013-2015. With primary forest loss increasing since 2015&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/06/global-tree-cover-loss-data-2019" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">in Brazil</a>, the country where soy has replaced the most forest, it remains to be seen whether those declines will continue.</p>



<p>Although data on plantation wood fiber and rubber is more limited than other commodities, the analysis also shows some recent declines in the rate at which such plantations replaced forests. These correspond with a decline in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/commodity-markets" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">prices for rubber</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://asiapulppaper.com/-/paper-mills" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">zero-deforestation commitments</a>&nbsp;for most large wood fiber companies.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Cattle, Cocoa and Coffee Continue to Overtake Forests</h3>



<p>We did not see any noticeable changes in the rate at which cattle pasture replaced forests since 2001, despite a number of <a href="https://insights.trase.earth/yearbook/contexts/brazilian-beef" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">zero-deforestation</a> <a href="https://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/blog/implementing-and-scaling-up-the-cgf-zero-net-deforestation-commitment/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">commitments</a>. Deforestation from cattle is much harder to tackle from within <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-12-17/saving-the-amazon-starts-with-cleaning-up-the-beef-industry" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">supply chains</a>, because pasture expansion happens in some places despite very low or even negative&nbsp;<a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/26268895?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">profit margins</a>. In those cases, landholders may convert forests to pasture as a form of&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320713004394?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">land speculation</a>, to secure&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264837716000193?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">land tenure</a>, or for&nbsp;<a href="https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10088017" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">social and cultural reasons</a>&nbsp;rather than for profit.</p>



<p>Beef consumption also tends to be more domestic; only around&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/brazil-livestock-and-products-annual-7" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">a quarter</a>&nbsp;of beef produced in Brazil is exported. This makes beef supply chains less responsive to international pressure around reducing deforestation.</p>



<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart" data-src="visualisation/3655447"><script src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/embed.js"></script></div>



<p>Other agricultural commodities showing limited progress in reducing deforestation are cocoa and coffee, though detailed maps of cocoa and coffee are difficult to produce, as these commodities are often grown under canopy cover and are hard to see in satellite imagery. We’ve seen fluctuations in recent years in the rates of primary forest loss in the big cocoa-producing countries of Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire. Better data sets on the footprint of cocoa production could greatly improve our understanding of how much those fluctuations are related to cocoa.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Untangling Commodities’ Impacts on Forests</h3>



<p>We are still a long way from fully understanding the complex dynamics between agricultural commodity production and deforestation. For example, the analysis can’t prove that land was deforested&nbsp;<em>because</em>&nbsp;of any one crop, only that the crop was planted in an area that was deforested. We also aren’t able to account for the indirect impacts that commodities may have on each other and the world’s forests, such as when the expansion of one crop displaces another into forests or drives up land values.</p>



<p>However, this analysis represents an important step towards understanding the impact of agricultural commodities on forests, giving us a starting point to estimate trends and map direct impacts. Detailed maps of where each commodity has replaced forests will better inform research as we continue to tease out these complex interactions, and help us evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to slow commodity-driven deforestation.</p>



<hr> 

<div class="attribute" style="”padding-bottom:" 10px;”=""> 
 

Originally appeared on <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2021/02/global-deforestation-agricultural-commodities" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WRI Insights</a>. 


 

</div> 

 

<hr>

New analysis shows agricultural commodities (cattle, oil palm, soy, cocoa, rubber, coffee and wood fiber) accounted for 26% of global tree cover loss.

Deforestation Linked to 7 Agricultural Commodities| GFW Blog

https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/3dc298e411f65b199fc3734919d6934e?s=96&d=mm&r=g

Global Nature Watch Blog

Filter by category and topics

The Commodity Report: Soy Production’s Impact on Forests in South America

Just 7 Commodities Replaced an Area of Forest Twice the Size of Germany from 2001-2015