One of the key agreements for Amazon rainforest protection – the soy moratorium – has been suspended by Brazilian authorities, potentially opening up an area the size of Portugal to destruction by farmers.
Coming less than three months before Brazil hosts the Cop30 climate summit in Belém, the news has shocked conservation groups, who say it is now more important than ever that consumers, supermarkets and traders stand up against Brazilian agribusiness groups that are using their growing political power to reverse past environmental gains.
Brazil is the world’s biggest soya bean exporter. The legume, used largely for animal and fish feed, is one of the most widely grown crops in Brazil, and posed a huge deforestation threat to the Amazon rainforest until stakeholders voluntarily agreed to impose a moratorium and no longer source it from the region in 2006.
The voluntary agreement brought together farmers, environmentalists and international food companies such as Cargill and McDonald’s, and determined that any detection of soya beans planted on areas deforested after 2008 would result in the farm being blocked from supply chains, regardless of whether the land clearance was legal in Brazil.
In the 19 years since, the moratorium has been hailed as a conservation success story that has improved the reputation of global brands, enabled soy production to expand significantly without Amazon destruction and prevented an estimated 17,000 sq km of deforestation.
But earlier this week it was revealed that the anti-monopoly agency, Cade (the administrative council for economic defence) had given grain traders, such as Bunge, Cargill, Louis Dreyfus and Cofco, 10 days to suspend the moratorium or face financial penalties. Cade’s general superintendent, Alexandre Barreto de Souza, said he had instigated an investigation into the moratorium, noting that it involved sharing commercially sensitive information.
Greenpeace Brazil called the move a “terrible mistake”, which was the result of political pressure from the “regressive wings of agribusiness” that aimed to punish those who protect forests and reward those who profit the most from Amazon destruction.
“Without the soy moratorium, considered one of the most effective multistakeholder agreements in the world, soy will once again become a major driver of Amazon deforestation, and this will bury any chance of Brazil meeting its climate targets,” Cristiane Mazzetti, the group’s forest campaign coordinator, said.
Politically, the timing could not be more embarrassing for the government of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. In November, Brazil will stage the first climate conference to be held in the Amazon, which the hosts had hoped would be a showcase for the gains it has made in reducing deforestation.
But in the Brazilian congress, the dominant agribusiness lobby has passed legislation that undermines indigenous land demarcation and the environmental licensing system, a step that conservation groups have described as the biggest setback in 40 years. The new ruling on the soy moratorium adds to the retreat.
“Tearing up this agreement on the eve of the Cop30 climate talks sends completely the wrong signal to the world,” Tanya Steele, WWF-UK’s chief executive, said. “This is a perilous development that puts a decade-long agreement to protect the Amazon in the bin and would have a far-reaching impact on UK and global companies too. This suspension has to be reversed. After a summer of fires and extreme heat experienced right across the world, now more than ever we need to be safeguarding the Amazon.”
Much of the political pressure has come from Mato Grosso state, the soya bean capital of Brazil, which last year revoked tax incentives for companies engaged in agreements such as the soy moratorium. Industry group Aprosoja Mato Grosso welcomed the “historic” decision against what it called “a private agreement without legal support [that] has been imposing unfair trade barriers on farmers”.
after newsletter promotion
David Cleary, a retired NGO director involved with the Amazon since the 1980s, says soya bean producers want more land to expand production and to increase the value of their assets in the Amazon. He estimates that about 10m hectares (25m acres) – about the size of Portugal – could be suitable for legal clearance for soya if the moratorium is revoked, pushing up the value of that land by fivefold.
Many expect protracted legal challenges on the grounds that the moratorium cannot be considered a cartel. In the meantime, conservationists urge soya bean traders to continue with the principles of the moratorium on an individual basis for the sake of their international reputations.
There is strong support among consumers for Amazon protection. A WWF poll earlier this year found 70% of Britons support government action to remove illegal deforestation from UK supply chains.
“Consumers and retailers have a vital role to play,” said Bel Lyon of WWF-UK. “Market demand must not allow the profits of a few to fuel ecosystem collapse and price instability. Forests are essential for food and energy security, offering climate and health benefits in an increasingly unstable world.”