<p>Total tropical primary forest loss in 2023 totaled 3.7 million hectares, the equivalent of losing almost 10 football (soccer) fields of forest per minute. <a href="https://gfw.global/3TPufvy" rel="noopener" target="_blank">View on the Global Forest Review.</a></p>


2023 Tree Cover Loss Data Analysis

Insights

Insights | Global Forest Watch Blog

cattle

cattle | Global Forest Watch Blog

commodities

commodities | Global Forest Watch Blog

palm oil

palm oil | Global Forest Watch Blog

soy | Global Forest Watch Blog

Mikaela Weisse

Liz Goldman

<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

Comment

Global Forest Watch Content

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

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

Sarah Ruiz

Deforestation Alerts

Deforestation Alerts | Global Forest Watch Blog

Katie Lyons

<div class="attribute"><i>Places to Watch is an initiative that uses weekly <a href="http://www.glad.umd.edu/projects/global-forest-watch" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">GLAD alerts</a> on Global Forest Watch to spot changes in forests around the globe and identify the most consequential cases of recent deforestation. By pairing deforestation alerts with expert interpretation of satellite imagery, credible descriptions of what is happening on the ground and resources to learn more, we hope to galvanize action to prevent further forest loss.</i> <a href="http://connect.wri.org/l/120942/2017-12-07/3mtt5w" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Sign up here to receive each quarterly edition of Places to Watch</a>.</div>
<hr />
<p>This edition of Places to Watch examines forest clearing hotspots in Colombia, Brazil and Indonesian Papua. All three disturbances highlighted in this curation are primarily caused by human clearing as opposed to natural fires or disasters. The approximate areas affected are based on satellite detection between February 1, 2018 and April 30, 2018. However, due to occasional cloud cover that can obscure satellite recognition, some loss may have occurred earlier.</p>
<h3>Rapid Clearing within Tinigua National Park, Colombia</h3>
<div class="imagecenter"><a href="http://bit.ly/2JQR1Ro" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/PTWJune2018_ColombiaGIF.gif" width="100%" /></a>Forest clearing in Tinigua from October 2017 through April 2018. Photos: Planet Labs, Inc.</div>
<div>
<p>Nearly 7000 hectares of <a href="http://bit.ly/2JZrViJ" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Tinigua National Park</a> (approximately three percent of the total park area) in southeast Colombia were affected by forest clearing since the beginning of 2018, according to GLAD deforestation alerts on Global Forest Watch. Tinigua is part of a block of four national parks that sit at the convergence of the Andes, Amazon and Orinoco ecosystems. Due to their location, these parks are of <a href="http://caracol.com.co/radio/2018/03/16/ecologia/1521160202_411750.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">critical importance</a> for biodiversity, ecosystem services and watershed conservation.</p>
<p>According to Colombia’s Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies (IDEAM), which featured Tinigua as a deforestation hotspot in a <a href="http://smbyc.ideam.gov.co/MonitoreoBC-WEB/pub/alertasDeforestacion.jsp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">recent bulletin</a>, the changes observed in Tinigua are due to the use of fire to clear forests to open land for crops or livestock. This type of widespread land grabbing is likely associated with a lack of governance and land speculation following the end of the armed conflict with the FARC.</p>
<p>The recent clearing has not gone unnoticed by Colombian authorities. In April, a <a href="http://www.parquesnacionales.gov.co/portal/es/comunicado-de-prensa-interagencial/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">joint military operation</a> in Tinigua and neighboring Sierra de la Macarena National Park resulted in the arrest of three people, who were charged with damage to natural resources and invasion of ecologically important areas.</p>
<p>The rapid clearing in Tinigua comes at a crucial time for Colombia: IDEAM announced last week the <a href="http://hsbnoticias.com/noticias/nacional/ideam-deforestacion-aumento-un-23-en-el-2017-afectando-2190-428812" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">deforestation rate went up again in 2017</a>, following a <a href="http://sostenibilidad.semana.com/medio-ambiente/articulo/deforestacion-en-colombia-2016-la-perdida-mas-grande-de-los-ultimos-25-anos/38156" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">record year in 2016</a> also related to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/11/colombia-deforestation-farc" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the demobilization</a> of the FARC rebels, which opened up large areas of the Colombian Amazon. A <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2018/05/colombias-supreme-court-orders-government-to-stop-amazon-deforestation/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Supreme Court decision</a> on a case brought by 25 young people ordered the government to stop deforestation in the Colombian Amazon. The Colombian government also announced a new “<a href="http://caracol.com.co/radio/2018/02/01/ecologia/1517440973_535818.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Green Belt</a>” project in April, which aims to protect and restore 9.2 million hectares on the deforestation frontier, including parts of Tinigua National Park.</p>
<h3>Large Area Cleared for Pasture in Apuí, Brazil</h3>
<div class="imagecenter"><a href="http://bit.ly/2JTftSw" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/PTWJune2018_Brazil.jpg" width="100%" /></a>Forest clearing for cattle ranching in Apuí Brazil. Photo: Planet Labs, Inc.</div>
<div></div>
<div>
<p>A <a href="http://bit.ly/2JZst8h" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">patch of more than 750 hectares</a>—about the size of 1,000 soccer fields—was cleared in the early part of 2018 in the Apuí municipality of the Brazilian Amazon, according to GLAD deforestation alerts. The clearing, located around ten kilometers from the Transamazon Highway, appears to be an expansion of nearby cattle ranching areas into intact forest.</p>
<p>According to Gabriel Carrero, a senior researcher for the Institute of <a href="http://idesam.org/en/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Conservation and Sustainable Development of the Amazon</a> (IDESAM) in Brazil and a Ph.D. student at the University of Florida, the clearing is likely illegal. “[The clearing] is within the Rio Juma Settlement project, which should be settled by small colonists, one farm lot (roughly 75 hectares each) per family,” Carrero explained via email. Carrero says the large size of the clearing indicates that it is probably an outside group clearing the land, rather than a family in the settlement. “The Settlement has been occupied in large part by capitalized farmers and agricultural businesses, which has lost its planned purpose for small family farmers,” he said, pointing to the neighboring large pasture cleared by wealthy landholders from Pará.</p>
<p>Apuí has faced mounting pressures on forests over the last 40 years, beginning with the construction of the <a href="http://idesam.org.br/publicacao/Oportunidades-REDD-1-Analise-Profloram.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Transamazon Highway</a> in the 1970s. Not long after, a government resettlement program brought thousands of families to the region to ranch and farm. Population has tripled in Apuí since the 1990s, and the area has faced <a href="http://imazon.org.br/PDFimazon/Ingles/forest_transparency/SAD-May2014.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">high rates of land clearing</a>, particularly for ranching. <a href="https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss2/art26/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Researchers believe</a> that much of the deforestation in Apuí may be speculative in nature – as transportation infrastructure improves, landholders are betting that land prices will increase.</p>
<p>The continued expansion of ranching in Apuí is troubling given the remoteness of the area and the large amount of intact forest that still surrounds the Transamazon Highway. Better enforcement is needed, even in these remote areas, to ensure that the clearing does not continue.</p>
</div>
<h3>Consumer Goods Companies Linked to Large Scale Palm Oil Clearing in Indonesian Papua</h3>
<div class="imagecenter"><a href="http://bit.ly/2JN06uJ" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/PTWJune2018_Indonesia.jpg" alt="Oil palm clearing in a concession area of Papua, Indonesia. Photo: Planet Labs, Inc." width="100%" /></a>Oil palm clearing in a concession area of Papua, Indonesia. Photo: Planet Labs, Inc.</div>
<div></div>
<div>
<p>More than <a href="http://bit.ly/2K1MavZ" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">600 hectares in an oil palm concession</a> in Indonesia Papua were affected from February through April, bringing the total area affected to approximately 4,500 hectares since 2015. In line with Global Forest Watch data, a recent analysis from Greenpeace “suggests that around 4,000 hectares of rainforest were cleared in PT Megakarya Jaya Raya concession between May 2015 and April 2017 – an area almost half the size of Paris.” PT Megakarya Jaya Raya is a palm oil concession controlled by a privately-owned conglomerate, Hayel Saeed Anam Group (HSA).</p>
<p>Recent media coverage of this clearing, including a <a href="https://www.greenpeace.org/international/press-release/16194/new-deforestation-revealed-as-indonesian-minister-arrives-in-eu-to-defend-palm-oil-industry/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">press release from Greenpeace</a>, alleges that while this particular concession is not yet producing palm oil, two other subsidiaries of Hayel Saeed Anam Group “supplied palm oil to Mars, Nestlé, PepsiCo and Unilever.” This association could jeopardize certification status for the associated subsidiaries (Arma Group and Pacific Oils & Fats). The <a href="https://rspo.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil</a> (RSPO), the certification mechanism for sustainable palm oil production, has confirmed that the subsidiaries are indeed RSPO members, but the group has not confirmed the plantation companies associated with these large consumer goods companies are indeed HSA subsidiaries.</p>
<p>This location was also featured in a previous edition of <a href="https://blog.globalforestwatch.org/supplychain/agriculture/balancing-development-and-forest-protection-in-papua" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Places to Watch last year</a>. Unfortunately, the exposure of the clearing has not yet translated to a company commitment to halt further clearing. While this clearing may be authorized under the relevant permits, it is in direct breach of RSPO standards, and at odds with the deforestation-free purchasing policies of most large retailers and manufacturers.</p>
<p><strong>A Time to Act</strong></p>
<p>Government agencies, private companies and local people have the power to stop deforestation before it is too late, and readers like you can help this process by drawing public attention to these areas. We encourage you to share these places, including on social media using #PlacesToWatch.</p>
<p>To stay abreast of more developments in the world’s forests, <a href="http://connect.wri.org/l/120942/2017-12-07/3mtt5w" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">sign up to receive each quarterly edition of Places to Watch</a> straight to your inbox, and read our <a href="https://blog.globalforestwatch.org/data/places-to-watch-curating-data-driven-stories-for-action" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">blog post</a> for more detail on how we spot and select these at-risk areas.</p>
</div>
<style type="text/css"></style>
</div>

Places to Watch: 3 Hotspots for Forest Clearing Right Now

<div class="attribute"><i>Places to Watch is an initiative that uses weekly <a href="http://www.glad.umd.edu/projects/global-forest-watch" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">GLAD alerts</a> on Global Forest Watch to spot changes in forests around the globe and identify the most consequential cases of recent deforestation. By pairing deforestation alerts with expert interpretation of satellite imagery, credible descriptions of what is happening on the ground and resources to learn more, we hope to galvanize action to prevent further forest loss.</i> <a href="http://connect.wri.org/l/120942/2017-12-07/3mtt5w" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Sign up here to receive each quarterly edition of Places to Watch</a>.</div>

<hr />

This edition of Places to Watch examines forest clearing hotspots in Colombia, Brazil and Indonesian Papua. All three disturbances highlighted in this curation are primarily caused by human clearing as opposed to natural fires or disasters. The approximate areas affected are based on satellite detection between February 1, 2018 and April 30, 2018. However, due to occasional cloud cover that can obscure satellite recognition, some loss may have occurred earlier.
<h3>Rapid Clearing within Tinigua National Park, Colombia</h3>
<div class="imagecenter"><a href="http://bit.ly/2JQR1Ro" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/PTWJune2018_ColombiaGIF.gif" width="100%" /></a>Forest clearing in Tinigua from October 2017 through April 2018. Photos: Planet Labs, Inc.</div>
<div>

Nearly 7000 hectares of <a href="http://bit.ly/2JZrViJ" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Tinigua National Park</a> (approximately three percent of the total park area) in southeast Colombia were affected by forest clearing since the beginning of 2018, according to GLAD deforestation alerts on Global Forest Watch. Tinigua is part of a block of four national parks that sit at the convergence of the Andes, Amazon and Orinoco ecosystems. Due to their location, these parks are of <a href="http://caracol.com.co/radio/2018/03/16/ecologia/1521160202_411750.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">critical importance</a> for biodiversity, ecosystem services and watershed conservation.

According to Colombia’s Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies (IDEAM), which featured Tinigua as a deforestation hotspot in a <a href="http://smbyc.ideam.gov.co/MonitoreoBC-WEB/pub/alertasDeforestacion.jsp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">recent bulletin</a>, the changes observed in Tinigua are due to the use of fire to clear forests to open land for crops or livestock. This type of widespread land grabbing is likely associated with a lack of governance and land speculation following the end of the armed conflict with the FARC.

The recent clearing has not gone unnoticed by Colombian authorities. In April, a <a href="http://www.parquesnacionales.gov.co/portal/es/comunicado-de-prensa-interagencial/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">joint military operation</a> in Tinigua and neighboring Sierra de la Macarena National Park resulted in the arrest of three people, who were charged with damage to natural resources and invasion of ecologically important areas.

The rapid clearing in Tinigua comes at a crucial time for Colombia: IDEAM announced last week the <a href="http://hsbnoticias.com/noticias/nacional/ideam-deforestacion-aumento-un-23-en-el-2017-afectando-2190-428812" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">deforestation rate went up again in 2017</a>, following a <a href="http://sostenibilidad.semana.com/medio-ambiente/articulo/deforestacion-en-colombia-2016-la-perdida-mas-grande-de-los-ultimos-25-anos/38156" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">record year in 2016</a> also related to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/11/colombia-deforestation-farc" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the demobilization</a> of the FARC rebels, which opened up large areas of the Colombian Amazon. A <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2018/05/colombias-supreme-court-orders-government-to-stop-amazon-deforestation/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Supreme Court decision</a> on a case brought by 25 young people ordered the government to stop deforestation in the Colombian Amazon. The Colombian government also announced a new “<a href="http://caracol.com.co/radio/2018/02/01/ecologia/1517440973_535818.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Green Belt</a>” project in April, which aims to protect and restore 9.2 million hectares on the deforestation frontier, including parts of Tinigua National Park.
<h3>Large Area Cleared for Pasture in Apuí, Brazil</h3>
<div class="imagecenter"><a href="http://bit.ly/2JTftSw" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/PTWJune2018_Brazil.jpg" width="100%" /></a>Forest clearing for cattle ranching in Apuí Brazil. Photo: Planet Labs, Inc.</div>
<div></div>
<div>

A <a href="http://bit.ly/2JZst8h" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">patch of more than 750 hectares</a>—about the size of 1,000 soccer fields—was cleared in the early part of 2018 in the Apuí municipality of the Brazilian Amazon, according to GLAD deforestation alerts. The clearing, located around ten kilometers from the Transamazon Highway, appears to be an expansion of nearby cattle ranching areas into intact forest.

According to Gabriel Carrero, a senior researcher for the Institute of <a href="http://idesam.org/en/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Conservation and Sustainable Development of the Amazon</a> (IDESAM) in Brazil and a Ph.D. student at the University of Florida, the clearing is likely illegal. “[The clearing] is within the Rio Juma Settlement project, which should be settled by small colonists, one farm lot (roughly 75 hectares each) per family,” Carrero explained via email. Carrero says the large size of the clearing indicates that it is probably an outside group clearing the land, rather than a family in the settlement. “The Settlement has been occupied in large part by capitalized farmers and agricultural businesses, which has lost its planned purpose for small family farmers,” he said, pointing to the neighboring large pasture cleared by wealthy landholders from Pará.

Apuí has faced mounting pressures on forests over the last 40 years, beginning with the construction of the <a href="http://idesam.org.br/publicacao/Oportunidades-REDD-1-Analise-Profloram.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Transamazon Highway</a> in the 1970s. Not long after, a government resettlement program brought thousands of families to the region to ranch and farm. Population has tripled in Apuí since the 1990s, and the area has faced <a href="http://imazon.org.br/PDFimazon/Ingles/forest_transparency/SAD-May2014.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">high rates of land clearing</a>, particularly for ranching. <a href="https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss2/art26/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Researchers believe</a> that much of the deforestation in Apuí may be speculative in nature – as transportation infrastructure improves, landholders are betting that land prices will increase.

The continued expansion of ranching in Apuí is troubling given the remoteness of the area and the large amount of intact forest that still surrounds the Transamazon Highway. Better enforcement is needed, even in these remote areas, to ensure that the clearing does not continue.

</div>
<h3>Consumer Goods Companies Linked to Large Scale Palm Oil Clearing in Indonesian Papua</h3>
<div class="imagecenter"><a href="http://bit.ly/2JN06uJ" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" src="https://content.globalforestwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/PTWJune2018_Indonesia.jpg" alt="Oil palm clearing in a concession area of Papua, Indonesia. Photo: Planet Labs, Inc." width="100%" /></a>Oil palm clearing in a concession area of Papua, Indonesia. Photo: Planet Labs, Inc.</div>
<div></div>
<div>

More than <a href="http://bit.ly/2K1MavZ" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">600 hectares in an oil palm concession</a> in Indonesia Papua were affected from February through April, bringing the total area affected to approximately 4,500 hectares since 2015. In line with Global Forest Watch data, a recent analysis from Greenpeace “suggests that around 4,000 hectares of rainforest were cleared in PT Megakarya Jaya Raya concession between May 2015 and April 2017 – an area almost half the size of Paris.” PT Megakarya Jaya Raya is a palm oil concession controlled by a privately-owned conglomerate, Hayel Saeed Anam Group (HSA).

Recent media coverage of this clearing, including a <a href="https://www.greenpeace.org/international/press-release/16194/new-deforestation-revealed-as-indonesian-minister-arrives-in-eu-to-defend-palm-oil-industry/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">press release from Greenpeace</a>, alleges that while this particular concession is not yet producing palm oil, two other subsidiaries of Hayel Saeed Anam Group “supplied palm oil to Mars, Nestlé, PepsiCo and Unilever.” This association could jeopardize certification status for the associated subsidiaries (Arma Group and Pacific Oils &amp; Fats). The <a href="https://rspo.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil</a> (RSPO), the certification mechanism for sustainable palm oil production, has confirmed that the subsidiaries are indeed RSPO members, but the group has not confirmed the plantation companies associated with these large consumer goods companies are indeed HSA subsidiaries.

This location was also featured in a previous edition of <a href="https://blog.globalforestwatch.org/supplychain/agriculture/balancing-development-and-forest-protection-in-papua" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Places to Watch last year</a>. Unfortunately, the exposure of the clearing has not yet translated to a company commitment to halt further clearing. While this clearing may be authorized under the relevant permits, it is in direct breach of RSPO standards, and at odds with the deforestation-free purchasing policies of most large retailers and manufacturers.

<strong>A Time to Act</strong>

Government agencies, private companies and local people have the power to stop deforestation before it is too late, and readers like you can help this process by drawing public attention to these areas. We encourage you to share these places, including on social media using #PlacesToWatch.

To stay abreast of more developments in the world’s forests, <a href="http://connect.wri.org/l/120942/2017-12-07/3mtt5w" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">sign up to receive each quarterly edition of Places to Watch</a> straight to your inbox, and read our <a href="https://blog.globalforestwatch.org/data/places-to-watch-curating-data-driven-stories-for-action" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">blog post</a> for more detail on how we spot and select these at-risk areas.

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

Places to Watch is an initiative that uses weekly GLAD alerts on Global Forest Watch to spot changes in forests around the globe and identify the most

Places to Watch: 3 Hotspots for Forest Clearing Right Now | Global Forest Watch Blog

https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/0fa0ee27160b46f12c1f3e6cc973f07a?s=96&d=mm&r=g

Katie Fletcher

indigenous peoples

indigenous peoples | Global Forest Watch Blog

<p>By  <a href="http://www.wri.org/profile/peter-veit" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Peter Veit</a> and <a href="http://www.wri.org/profile/ryan-sarsfield" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Ryan Sarsfield</a> </p>
<div class="imageright"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="" src="http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/5695432339_8e65654202_o.jpg?itok=QKorb6jX" width="100%" />Cows in the Paraguayan Chaco. Flickr/Arcadius.</div>
<p> In the last 15 years, Paraguay <a href="http://bit.ly/2zanpIq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">lost a greater share of its forest</a> than almost any other country on Earth. While soy farming once drove deforestation in the east, the focus of Paraguay’s forest loss has since moved west to the low-lying, thorn-forested Chaco, where cattle ranching has claimed over 3.7 million hectares (9 million acres) of forest for pastureland – an area about the size of the Netherlands – between 2001 and 2015.  The trends in Paraguay <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/108/9/3465.abstract" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">are reflected globally</a>, as agriculture expands its footprint at the expense of Indigenous Peoples and forests. Companies around the world, especially those linked to major drivers of deforestation, face increasing pressure to address environmental and social risks in their supply chains, and many <a href="http://www.supply-change.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">have already made zero deforestation</a> and <a href="https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2014-03-18/pepsico-declares-zero-tolerance-land-grabs-supply-chain" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">zero land grabbing</a> commitments. Yet few global beef companies have adopted basic sourcing criteria or global, time-bound commitments to curb deforestation and to protect indigenous land rights.  The Paraguayan beef industry encounters little economic pressure to stop clearing forests and respect land rights because it exports to lower-value markets that impose few limits on imports beyond sanitary controls, like foot and mouth disease regulations. None of the export destinations insist on farm boundaries. Chile, for example, only requires documentation of the corral location.  </p>
<aside id="newsletter"><strong><span style="font-size: 1.5em; color: #97bd3d;">Never miss an update!</span></strong> </p>
<div></div>
<div class="notified">To get notified about stories like these, sign up for the GFW Monthly Recap.</div>
<p> <a href="http://content.globalforestwatch.org/supplychain/closing-data-gaps-to-eliminate-deforestation-and-land-disputes-from-beef-supply-chains-in-paraguay.html?show_newsletter=true"><button>Subscribe</button></a>  </aside>
<p>If Paraguay wants to reach higher-value markets, like the United States, the European Union and Japan, it needs to prove its beef is up to their stricter environmental and social standards. It must comply with the increasingly stringent requirements of global supermarkets and fast food chains that are facing pressure to eliminate deforestation and land grabbing from their supply chains. It’s a complex problem made worse by the lack of information on the boundaries and environmental compliance of cattle ranches. Without this data, it will be impossible for Paraguayan meatpackers to reduce forest loss and respect indigenous land rights in their supply chains. </p>
<h3>Deforestation Fuels Land Disputes with Indigenous Peoples</h3>
<div class="imagecenter"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="" src="http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/22261462294_0f3c8a0fb0_o.jpg" width="100%" /></div>
<p> As cattle ranchers have cut down the Chaco’s forests, land disputes with Indigenous Peoples have erupted across the region. Western Paraguay is home to the Ayoreo, Chamacoco, Enxet, Nivakle, Manjuy, Maka’a, Toba Qom, Nandeva and the Guarayo. These communities rely almost entirely on the water, food, medicine and shelter that forests provide. Deforestation and land loss directly threaten their way of life.  But indigenous communities are up against a powerful, rapidly-expanding beef industry supported by a pro-agribusiness government. Large-scale cattle ranches are making it harder for indigenous communities to secure their traditional land. Since most land in the Chaco is privately held, the government must purchase land from the <em>de facto</em> owner and grant it to Indigenous Peoples. But by driving up land values in the Chaco, the economically and politically influential beef industry has helped made these purchases more expensive, exacerbating tensions with indigenous communities.  These land conflicts — and the forest conversion associated with them — are bad for business in higher-value export destinations. To reach consumers in these more lucrative markets, Paraguay’s beef industry must comply with the sourcing criteria of an increasingly significant number of buyers who explicitly exclude beef produced in areas of indigenous land conflict or recently deforested regions. Increasingly, multinational supermarkets and restaurant chains are unwilling to risk association with these liabilities and are purchasing accordingly. </p>
<h3>No Data, No Action</h3>
<p> Companies cannot curb deforestation and mediate land disputes without better information. Only by understanding the impacts of deforestation <em>and</em> the socioeconomic context can an industry efficiently enforce controls on sourcing. In Paraguay, this contextual data includes ranch boundaries, protected areas and other property locations, environmental license data (for example, legally sanctioned land-use change data) and comprehensive information on indigenous lands, including legally recognized and claimed lands (such as those disputed or in process with the government or the international legal system).  But this information is not available to meatpackers or the public. A beef company attempting to monitor its sourcing and screen for potentially illegal deforestation or indigenous land conflicts faces enormous difficulties getting accurate data. </p>
<h3>Improving Data to Eliminate Risks in Supply Chains</h3>
<div class="imageleft"><img decoding="async" class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="" src="http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/4764896343_b20dec2a95_o.jpg" width="100%" />A tree on the edge of the desert in the Chaco. Flickr/Tetsumo</div>
<p> In the long term, a unified political effort spanning national and departmental authorities that brings together land use data, land rights information and associated data to cartographically unify Paraguay’s mapping systems holds potential. A good start would involve increasing the availability of <a href="http://www.landmarkmap.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">data on legally-recognized indigenous lands</a>, indigenous land claims, and land conflicts, and then integrating this information with <a href="http://bit.ly/2A0NmHk" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">increasingly available forest data</a>, official government cadaster data (register of property ownership) and environmental licenses to reflect the context of land conflict. Each of these elements contributes to a more complete and transparent portrayal of the vast changes underway in Paraguay’s land use. Finally, the means to access and use this data for supply chain monitoring is critical and is likewise <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/new-tool-tracks-deforestation-in-supply-chains/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">advancing</a> <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/new-tool-tracks-deforestation-in-supply-chains/">rapidly</a>.  With investments in data and mapping technology, Paraguay can start to fill the gaps that hinder the development of its export markets and protect indigenous peoples’ rights and its forests in the process.  </p>


Closing Data Gaps to Eliminate Deforestation and Land Disputes from Beef Supply Chains in Paraguay

By  <a href="http://www.wri.org/profile/peter-veit" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Peter Veit</a> and <a href="http://www.wri.org/profile/ryan-sarsfield" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Ryan Sarsfield</a> <div class="imageright"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="" src="http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/5695432339_8e65654202_o.jpg?itok=QKorb6jX" width="100%" />Cows in the Paraguayan Chaco. Flickr/Arcadius.</div> In the last 15 years, Paraguay <a href="http://bit.ly/2zanpIq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">lost a greater share of its forest</a> than almost any other country on Earth. While soy farming once drove deforestation in the east, the focus of Paraguay's forest loss has since moved west to the low-lying, thorn-forested Chaco, where cattle ranching has claimed over 3.7 million hectares (9 million acres) of forest for pastureland – an area about the size of the Netherlands – between 2001 and 2015.  The trends in Paraguay <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/108/9/3465.abstract" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">are reflected globally</a>, as agriculture expands its footprint at the expense of Indigenous Peoples and forests. Companies around the world, especially those linked to major drivers of deforestation, face increasing pressure to address environmental and social risks in their supply chains, and many <a href="http://www.supply-change.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">have already made zero deforestation</a> and <a href="https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressreleases/2014-03-18/pepsico-declares-zero-tolerance-land-grabs-supply-chain" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">zero land grabbing</a> commitments. Yet few global beef companies have adopted basic sourcing criteria or global, time-bound commitments to curb deforestation and to protect indigenous land rights.  The Paraguayan beef industry encounters little economic pressure to stop clearing forests and respect land rights because it exports to lower-value markets that impose few limits on imports beyond sanitary controls, like foot and mouth disease regulations. None of the export destinations insist on farm boundaries. Chile, for example, only requires documentation of the corral location.  <aside id="newsletter"><strong><span style="font-size: 1.5em; color: #97bd3d;">Never miss an update!</span></strong> <div></div> <div class="notified">To get notified about stories like these, sign up for the GFW Monthly Recap.</div> <a href="http://content.globalforestwatch.org/supplychain/closing-data-gaps-to-eliminate-deforestation-and-land-disputes-from-beef-supply-chains-in-paraguay.html?show_newsletter=true"><button>Subscribe</button></a>  </aside>If Paraguay wants to reach higher-value markets, like the United States, the European Union and Japan, it needs to prove its beef is up to their stricter environmental and social standards. It must comply with the increasingly stringent requirements of global supermarkets and fast food chains that are facing pressure to eliminate deforestation and land grabbing from their supply chains. It's a complex problem made worse by the lack of information on the boundaries and environmental compliance of cattle ranches. Without this data, it will be impossible for Paraguayan meatpackers to reduce forest loss and respect indigenous land rights in their supply chains. <h3>Deforestation Fuels Land Disputes with Indigenous Peoples</h3> <div class="imagecenter"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="" src="http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/22261462294_0f3c8a0fb0_o.jpg" width="100%" /></div> As cattle ranchers have cut down the Chaco's forests, land disputes with Indigenous Peoples have erupted across the region. Western Paraguay is home to the Ayoreo, Chamacoco, Enxet, Nivakle, Manjuy, Maka'a, Toba Qom, Nandeva and the Guarayo. These communities rely almost entirely on the water, food, medicine and shelter that forests provide. Deforestation and land loss directly threaten their way of life.  But indigenous communities are up against a powerful, rapidly-expanding beef industry supported by a pro-agribusiness government. Large-scale cattle ranches are making it harder for indigenous communities to secure their traditional land. Since most land in the Chaco is privately held, the government must purchase land from the <em>de facto</em> owner and grant it to Indigenous Peoples. But by driving up land values in the Chaco, the economically and politically influential beef industry has helped made these purchases more expensive, exacerbating tensions with indigenous communities.  These land conflicts — and the forest conversion associated with them — are bad for business in higher-value export destinations. To reach consumers in these more lucrative markets, Paraguay's beef industry must comply with the sourcing criteria of an increasingly significant number of buyers who explicitly exclude beef produced in areas of indigenous land conflict or recently deforested regions. Increasingly, multinational supermarkets and restaurant chains are unwilling to risk association with these liabilities and are purchasing accordingly. <h3>No Data, No Action</h3> Companies cannot curb deforestation and mediate land disputes without better information. Only by understanding the impacts of deforestation <em>and</em> the socioeconomic context can an industry efficiently enforce controls on sourcing. In Paraguay, this contextual data includes ranch boundaries, protected areas and other property locations, environmental license data (for example, legally sanctioned land-use change data) and comprehensive information on indigenous lands, including legally recognized and claimed lands (such as those disputed or in process with the government or the international legal system).  But this information is not available to meatpackers or the public. A beef company attempting to monitor its sourcing and screen for potentially illegal deforestation or indigenous land conflicts faces enormous difficulties getting accurate data. <h3>Improving Data to Eliminate Risks in Supply Chains</h3> <div class="imageleft"><img class=" wp-image-3569 alignright" style="padding-bottom: 10px;" alt="" src="http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/4764896343_b20dec2a95_o.jpg" width="100%" />A tree on the edge of the desert in the Chaco. Flickr/Tetsumo</div> In the long term, a unified political effort spanning national and departmental authorities that brings together land use data, land rights information and associated data to cartographically unify Paraguay's mapping systems holds potential. A good start would involve increasing the availability of <a href="http://www.landmarkmap.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">data on legally-recognized indigenous lands</a>, indigenous land claims, and land conflicts, and then integrating this information with <a href="http://bit.ly/2A0NmHk" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">increasingly available forest data</a>, official government cadaster data (register of property ownership) and environmental licenses to reflect the context of land conflict. Each of these elements contributes to a more complete and transparent portrayal of the vast changes underway in Paraguay's land use. Finally, the means to access and use this data for supply chain monitoring is critical and is likewise <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/new-tool-tracks-deforestation-in-supply-chains/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">advancing</a> <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/new-tool-tracks-deforestation-in-supply-chains/">rapidly</a>.  With investments in data and mapping technology, Paraguay can start to fill the gaps that hinder the development of its export markets and protect indigenous peoples' rights and its forests in the process.  

By  Peter Veit and Ryan Sarsfield Cows in the Paraguayan Chaco. Flickr/Arcadius. In the last 15 years, Paraguay lost a greater share of its forest than

Closing Data Gaps to Eliminate Deforestation and Land Disputes from Beef Supply Chains in Paraguay | Global Forest Watch Blog

https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/24e4b4a3160f1ef325f06a7df2da246f?s=96&d=mm&r=g

Filter by category and topics

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

Places to Watch: 3 Hotspots for Forest Clearing Right Now

Closing Data Gaps to Eliminate Deforestation and Land Disputes from Beef Supply Chains in Paraguay