Zero-deforestation Commitments Research Articles

Will the EU deforestation-free products regulation (EUDR) reduce tropical forest loss? Insights from three producer countries

The European Union regulation on deforestation-free products (EUDR) represents a policy innovation with important implications for the governance of global commodity chains. We discuss the risks and limitations of this policy derived from an ex-ante assessment of the robustness of its theory of change. For doing so, we use insights from the literature on zero-deforestation commitments and other private standards in value chains and from trade and deforestation patterns in three relevant producer countries (Brazil, Colombia and Indonesia). Despite the potentially positive symbolic effect in mobilizing a global agenda for combating deforestation, the EUDR faces several drawbacks and risks associated with three of its constitutive features: To be demand-oriented, having the value chain as the unit of intervention and holding a high degree of unilateralism. We conclude that to be effective in curbing tropical deforestation, the Regulation must be complemented with international cooperation aiming to strengthen national policies with a territorial approach, as well as social movements addressing the underlying causes of forest loss and human rights violations in the territories where it takes place.

Corporate zero deforestation commitments and company-internal organizational change

This paper addresses knowledge gaps related to implementation of corporate zero deforestation commitments (ZDCs). Drawing on an analytical framework of organizational change, we scrutinize changes and processes internal to a company in adjusting to zero deforestation supply chains. The empirical data consists of 48 online questionnaires and 49 online interviews with actors involved in forest-risk commodity supply chains, both internal actors in companies and external actors (e.g., non-governmental organizations). Concerning organizational changes, the findings show that diverse drivers have triggered companies to adopt ZDCs, but most are external drivers. Organizational change following ZDCs has taken place within companies but only to a limited extent. Our study concludes that while corporate ZDCs can be seen as having advanced private governance in the fight against deforestation, more is needed still for effective implementation. Public governance and regulations could play an increasing role in stimulating adoption and implementation of private governance initiatives, like corporate ZDCs.

How well does the implementation of corporate zero-deforestation commitments in Indonesia align with aims to halt deforestation and include smallholders?

In response to growing scrutiny surrounding commodity-driven deforestation, companies have introduced zero-deforestation commitments (ZDCs) with ambitious environmental and social targets. However, such initiatives may not effectively reduce deforestation if they are not aligned with the spatial extent of remaining forests at risk. They may also fail to avert socio-economic risks if ZDCs do not consider smallholder farmers’ needs. We assess the spatial and functional fit of ZDCs by mapping commodity-driven deforestation and socio-economic risks, and comparing them to the spatial coverage and implementation of ZDCs in the Indonesian palm oil sector. Our study finds that companies’ ZDCs often underperform in four areas: traceability, compliance support for high-risk palm oil mills, transparency, and smallholder inclusion. In 2020, only one-third of companies sourcing from their own mills, and just 6% of those sourcing from external suppliers, achieved full traceability to plantations. Comparing the reach of ZDCs adopted by downstream buyers with those adopted by mill owners located further upstream, we find that high-quality ZDCs from buyers covered 62% of forests at risk, while mill owners’ ZDCs only covered 23% of forests at risk within the mill supply base. In Kalimantan and Papua, the current and future deforestation frontiers, the forests most at risk of conversion were predominantly covered by weak ZDCs lacking in policy comprehensiveness and implementation. Additionally, we find that only 46% of independent smallholder oil palm plots are in mill supply sheds whose owners offer programs and support for independent smallholders, indicating that smallholder inclusion is a significant challenge for ZDC companies. These results highlight the lack of spatial and functional alignment between supply chain policies and their local context as a significant gap in ZDC implementation and a challenge that the EU Deforestation Regulation will face.

Public and private sector zero-deforestation commitments and their impacts: A case study from South Sumatra Province, Indonesia

In Asia, Africa, and Latin America, complex drivers of deforestation have sparked mandatory and voluntary initiatives, including moratorium policies, zero-deforestation pledges and certification systems. The impacts of these different commitments, which aim to reduce deforestation, have yet to be documented or analytically scrutinized. Using South Sumatra as a case study, we used the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework to identify the context and impacts of public and private sector commitments. Public sector commitment was assessed by examining political will reflected in government policies and regulations, while private sector commitment was assessed by looking at compliance with mandatory and voluntary certification schemes. South Sumatra lost 63% of its natural forest between 1990 and 2019. Deforestation is driven by expansion of large-scale commercial plantations, as well as illegal logging and clearing. Our study indicates that public and private sector commitments do matter. Statistically, we found sufficient evidence that private sector commitments were able to significantly reduce deforestation from year of commitments to 2019, at a 90% confidence level. Efforts to support zero-deforestation commitments must involve radical shifts in current policy and practice, with stricter law enforcement to combat illegal activities, greater transparency to inform progress, and the development of strategic and actionable plans.

Projecting global oil palm expansion under zero-deforestation commitments: Direct and indirect land use change impacts

In the last three decades, global production of oil palm has boomed, which has partly come at the expense of tropical rainforests. Recognizing this, many companies operating in the palm oil industry have committed to eliminate deforestation from their operations, often referred to as zero-deforestation commitments (ZDCs). Here, we estimate that if ZDCs are fully adopted and enforced across all sectors and geographies, the global extent of oil palm plantations may be 11M ha or 40% smaller in 2030 than in a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario that assumes no compliance with ZDCs. As a result of such land-sparing effects, we estimate that 96M ha of forests are saved from conversion, of which, 17% would otherwise have been converted (directly or indirectly) due to expanding oil palm plantations. Overall, these figures suggest that ZDCs have the potential to deliver major environmental benefits if they are fully adopted and enforced.

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon could be halved by scaling up the implementation of zero-deforestation cattle commitments

Deforestation for agriculture is a key threat to global carbon stocks, biodiversity, and indigenous ways of life. In the absence of strong territorial governance, zero-deforestation commitments (ZDCs), corporate policies to decouple food production from deforestation, remain a central tool to combat this issue. Yet evidence on their effectiveness remains mixed and the mechanisms limiting effectiveness are poorly understood. To advance understanding of ZDCs’ potential at reducing deforestation, we developed the first spatially explicit estimates of farmers’ exposure to ZDC companies in the Brazilian Amazon cattle sector. Exposure was measured by determining the market share of ZDC firms from the first full year of ZDC adoption in 2010 until 2018. Our analysis evaluated how variation in this exposure influenced deforestation. We found the G4 Agreement, the most widespread and strongly implemented cattle ZDC, reduced cattle-driven deforestation by 7,000 ± 4,000 km2 (15 ± 8%) between 2010 and 2018. Additionally, had all firms adopted and implemented an effective ZDC, cattle-driven deforestation could have dropped by 24,000 ± 13,000 km2 (51 ± 28%). These results for the world’s principal deforestation hotspot suggests supply chain policies can substantially reduce deforestation. However, their effectiveness is contingent on widespread adoption and rigorous implementation, both of which are currently insufficient to prevent large scale deforestation. Increased adoption and implementation could be incentivized through greater pressure from the Brazilian government and import countries.

Deforestation-Free Commodity Supply Chains: Myth or Reality?

Since the early 2000s, many private companies, public-private coalitions, and governments have committed to remove deforestation from commodity supply chains. Despite these zero-deforestation commitments (ZDCs), high rates of deforestation persist and may even be increasing. On the upside, a few region- and commodity-specific ZDCs have contributed to reductions by up to hundreds of thousands of hectares of deforestation, with mixed evidence on associated leakage. ZDCs have also spurred progress in monitoring, traceability, and awareness of deforestation. On the downside, as currently implemented, supply chain initiatives only cover a small share of tropical deforestation. Government- and company-led ZDCs are just two components of broader policy mixes aimed at reducing deforestation. To be more impactful, ZDCs needs to cover entire biomes, supply bases of companies, and export and domestic markets, with special attention not to exclude marginal producers.

Goal-Based Private Sustainability Governance and Its Paradoxes in the Indonesian Palm Oil Sector

In response to stakeholder pressure, companies increasingly make ambitious forward-looking sustainability commitments. They then draw on corporate policies with varying degrees of alignment to disseminate and enforce corresponding behavioral rules among their suppliers and business partners. This goal-based turn in private sustainability governance has important implications for its likely environmental and social outcomes. Drawing on paradox theory, this article uses a case study of zero-deforestation commitments in the Indonesian palm oil sector to argue that goal-based private sustainability governance’s characteristics set the stage for two types of paradoxes to emerge: performing paradoxes between environmental, social, and economic sustainability goals, and organizing paradoxes between cooperation and competition approaches. Companies’ responses to these paradoxes, in turn, can explain the lack of full goal attainment and differential rates of progress between actors. These results draw our attention to the complexities hidden behind governance through goal setting in the corporate space, and raise important questions about the viability of similar strategies such as science-based targets and net-zero goals.

Sustainability of agricultural trade supply chains status, opportunities, and future directions

This study examines the sustainability of Agricultural Trade Supply Chains (ATSC) from the perspective of agricultural sustainable development, with a focus on five key aspects: production, processing and storage, transportation and logistics, trade, and consumer and market. Based on an analysis of 756 academic papers published between 2013 and 2022, scientific metric techniques were used to identify changes in the field's sustainability. The study highlights opportunities for the development of a sustainable agricultural product trade supply chain, including the use of blockchain technology to improve transparency and traceability, increasing consumer demand for sustainable and eco-friendly products, corporate zero-deforestation commitments, bioenergy market expansion, and the role of farm advisors in promoting sustainable production methods. This paper contributes to a structured understanding of the status and future directions of ATSC sustainability, emphasizing the importance of joint efforts across all links of the supply chain to meet the sustainable needs of consumers and promote environmental protection and social-friendly markets.

Implications of zero-deforestation palm oil for tropical grassy and dry forest biodiversity.

Many companies have made zero-deforestation commitments (ZDCs) to reduce carbon emissions and biodiversity losses linked to tropical commodities. However, ZDCs conserve areas primarily based on tree cover and aboveground carbon, potentially leading to the unintended consequence that agricultural expansion could be encouraged in biomes outside tropical rainforest, which also support important biodiversity. We examine locations suitable for zero-deforestation expansion of commercial oil palm, which is increasingly expanding outside the tropical rainforest biome, by generating empirical models of global suitability for rainfed and irrigated oil palm. We find that tropical grassy and dry forest biomes contain >50% of the total area of land climatically suitable for rainfed oil palm expansion in compliance with ZDCs (following the High Carbon Stock Approach; in locations outside urban areas and cropland), and that irrigation could double the area suitable for expansion in these biomes. Within these biomes, ZDCs fail to protect areas of high vertebrate richness from oil palm expansion. To prevent unintended consequences of ZDCs and minimize the environmental impacts of oil palm expansion, policies and governance for sustainable development and conservation must expand focus from rainforests to all tropical biomes.

How do companies implement their zero-deforestation commitments

More than 500 companies engaged in supply chains of forest-risk commodity have adopted zero-deforestation commitments (ZDCs). We use corporate social responsibility strategy and policy implementation theories to analyse the processes and conditions for ZDC implementation. We base our study on 35 semi-structured interviews with company representatives and sector actors, publicly available ZDC data, and company reports. The objective is to understand the opportunities and challenges of ZDC implementation at the level of companies. While past research addressed ZDC coverage and effectiveness, knowledge is still lacking on companies' perspectives on the implementation of their commitments. This study provides a unique perspective by integrating the direct experience and knowledge of private actors on an environmental governance regime. We find that companies see implementation of ZDCs as a journey and often rely on voluntary sustainability standards, aligning their strategies and key performance indicators (KPIs) to these. They engage directly in the supply chain, conducting projects “on-the-ground.” Implementing ZDCs requires the involvement of procurement departments and upper management, and collaborations within and between companies. Companies rely on service providers for in-depth knowledge and field implementation. They use monitoring tools, e.g. remote sensing, and see supply chain traceability as a prerequisite for implementation. Companies face numerous implementation challenges. Internally, companies often lack leadership on their ZDC, struggle to align commitments with the organization's operations and to manage suppliers, especially smallholders, and allocate insufficient resources. Externally, they lack common standards and stakeholder support, and face challenging regulatory conditions and missing market incentives. An uneven playing field creates leakage markets. Companies identify better leadership, technology and pre-competitive collaboration as potential solutions. Zero-deforestation commitments are unlikely to greatly contribute to reducing deforestation until better implementation processes, mechanisms, and conditions are in place.

Projecting Global Oil Palm Expansion Under Zero-Deforestation Commitments: Direct and Indirect Land Use Change Impacts

Projecting Global Oil Palm Expansion Under Zero-Deforestation Commitments: Direct and Indirect Land Use Change Impacts

The influence of company sourcing patterns on the adoption and effectiveness of zero-deforestation commitments in Brazil’s soy supply chain

Many companies sourcing agricultural commodities with high deforestation risk have committed to zero deforestation, meaning they intend to eliminate deforestation from their supply chains. While previous research has attempted to assess progress against such initiatives, little is known about how the characteristics of sourcing patterns may influence the adoption and potential effectiveness of zero-deforestation commitments. Supply chain stickiness – here defined as the geographic persistence in trade relationships between traders and sourcing regions over time – may reflect lock-in effects and the level of trust between the parties involved. Here, we use a metric of supply chain stickiness, calculated from temporal network analyses on the Brazilian soy export supply chain, as a proxy for these underlying dynamics to explore their effect on the adoption and effectiveness of zero deforestation commitments (ZDCs). Using data for 2004–2017, we find that although stickier traders are more likely to adopt ZDCs, they also appear to have less effective ZDCs than other traders (as indicated by the level of soy and territorial deforestation in their sourcing regions). This finding suggests that additional strategies are needed to increase the effectiveness of ZDCs.

Designing effective and equitable zero-deforestation supply chain policies

In response to the clearing of tropical forests for agricultural expansion, agri-food companies have adopted promises to eliminate deforestation from their supply chains in the form of ‘zero-deforestation commitments’ (ZDCs). While there is growing evidence about the environmental effectiveness of these commitments (i.e., whether they meet their conservation goals), there is little information on how they influence producers’ opportunity to access sustainable markets and related livelihood outcomes, or how design and implementation choices influence tradeoffs or potential synergies between effectiveness and equity in access. This paper explores these research gaps and makes three main contributions by: i) defining and justifying the importance of analyzing access equity and its relation to effectiveness when implementing forest-focused supply chain policies such as ZDCs, ii) identifying seven policy design principles that are likely to maximize synergies between effectiveness and access equity, and iii) assessing effectiveness-access equity tensions and synergies across common ZDC implementation mechanisms amongst the five largest firms in each of the leading agricultural forest-risk commodity sectors: palm oil, soybeans, beef cattle, and cocoa. To enhance forest conservation while avoiding harm to the most vulnerable farmers in the tropics, it is necessary to combine stringent rules with widespread capacity building, greater involvement of affected actors in the co-production of implementation mechanisms, and support for alternative rural development paths.

Mapping and Monitoring Zero-Deforestation Commitments.

A growing number of companies have announced zero-deforestation commitments (ZDCs) to eliminate commodities produced at the expense of forests from their supply chains. Translating these aspirational goals into forest conservation requires forest mapping and monitoring (M&M) systems that are technically adequate and therefore credible, salient so that they address the needs of decision makers, legitimate in that they are fair and unbiased, and scalable over space and time. We identify 12 attributes of M&M that contribute to these goals and assess how two prominent ZDC programs, the Amazon Soy Moratorium and the High Carbon Stock Approach, integrate these attributes into their M&M systems. These programs prioritize different attributes, highlighting fundamental trade-offs in M&M design. Rather than prescribe a one-size-fits-all solution, we provide policymakers and practitioners with guidance on the design of ZDC M&M systems that fit their specific use case and that may contribute to more effective implementation of ZDCs.

Biodiversity Monitoring in Long-Distance Food Supply Chains: Tools, Gaps and Needs to Meet Business Requirements and Sustainability Goals

Rampant loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services undermines the resilience of food systems. Robust knowledge on impacts is the first step to taking action, but long-distance food supply chains and indirect effects on and around farms make understanding impacts a challenge. This paper looks at the tools available for businesses in the food industry, especially retailers, to monitor and assess the biodiversity performance of their products. It groups tools according to their general scope to evaluate what is monitored (processes on-site, pressures on landscapes, impacts on species), at what scale (specific products, company performance, country-wide consumption levels), and compared to which baseline (pristine nature, alternative scenarios, governance targets). Altogether we find major gaps in the criteria for biodiversity or the criteria is weak in certification and standards, business accounting and reporting systems, and scientific modelling and analysis (biodiversity footprints). At the same time, massive investments have been made to strengthen existing tools, develop new ones, increase uptake and improve their effectiveness. We argue that business can and must take a leading role toward mitigating biodiversity impacts in partnership with policy makers and customers. Zero-deforestation commitments, for example, will need to be upheld by supporting changed practices in consumption (e.g., choice editing) and combating degradation within agricultural systems will require a shift toward more regenerative forms of farming (e.g., with norms embedded in robust standard systems). Operational targets are integral to monitoring biodiversity performance across all scales.

The effect of supply chain position on zero-deforestation commitments: evidence from the cocoa industry

ABSTRACT Global agrifood companies’ sustainability strategies have evolved to increasingly rely on self-set voluntary commitments to address the persistent social and environmental challenges embedded in commodity supply chains. While state actors continue to guide sustainability efforts within their jurisdictions, the onus is increasingly placed on corporations who pronounce their own measures to eliminate deforestation and other unethical practices associated with their business operations. In this contribution, we analyze the publicly available action plans from all corporate signatories to the Cocoa and Forests Initiative (CFI), a novel zero-deforestation commitment that focuses mainly on the world’s top cocoa producers: Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. We construct a CFI index to systematically compare company pledges and uncover any relationships between the strength or quality of a company’s CFI action plan and key company characteristics. We find that, contrary to what the literature would suggest, the consumer-facing and high brand value firms are pronouncing less stringent zero-deforestation commitments as compared to their upstream partners. We also find key gaps in the CFI, including the lack of clarity surrounding definitions and timelines, neglect of indirect supply chains, and unclear geospatial precision.

The Low Opportunity Costs of the Amazon Soy Moratorium

Brazil’s Amazon Soy Moratorium (ASM) contributed to overall reductions in Amazon deforestation since its implementation in 2006. Under the ASM, the Amazon soy sector maintains access to the growing share of the market that operates under zero-deforestation commitments. The ASM has been criticized as unfair to law-abiding producers. Only 1% of the approximately 14,000 soy farms in the Amazon Biome have soy-suitable, forested areas that could be deforested lawfully (49,273 ha). More than half of Amazon soy farms have soy-suitable areas that were deforested before 2008 and used for soy in 2019 (1.7 Mha). Taken together, these findings suggest that the opportunity costs of the ASM on current soy farms are low relative to the market access benefits.

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon Could Be Halved by Zero Deforestation Commitments

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon Could Be Halved by Zero Deforestation Commitments

Brazil's Amazon Soy Moratorium reduced deforestation.

Between 2004 and 2012, multiple policies contributed to one of the great conservation successes of the twenty-first century-an 84% decrease in the rate of Brazilian Amazon deforestation. Among the most prominent of these policies is the Amazon Soy Moratorium (ASM), an agreement by grain traders not to purchase soy grown on recently deforested land. The ASM inspired widespread adoption of similar zero-deforestation commitments, but its impact is poorly understood due to its overlap with other conservation policies. Here, we apply an econometric triple-differences model to remotely sensed deforestation data to isolate the ASM's impact within Brazil's Arc of Deforestation. We show that the ASM reduced deforestation in soy-suitable locations in the Amazon by 0.66 ± 0.32 percentage points relative to a counterfactual control, preventing 18,000 ± 9,000 km2 of deforestation over its first decade (2006-2016). Although these results highlight potential benefits of private conservation policies, the ASM's success was dependent on complementarities with public property registries and deforestation monitoring.