Skip to main content
Advertisement
Main content starts here
No access
Policy Forum
Environment and Development

Brazil's Soy Moratorium

Supply-chain governance is needed to avoid deforestation
Science
23 Jan 2015
Vol 347, Issue 6220
pp. 377-378

Abstract

Brazil's Soy Moratorium (SoyM) was the first voluntary zero-deforestation agreement implemented in the tropics and set the stage for supply-chain governance of other commodities, such as beef and palm oil [supplementary material (SM)]. In response to pressure from retailers and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), major soybean traders signed the SoyM, agreeing not to purchase soy grown on lands deforested after July 2006 in the Brazilian Amazon. The soy industry recently extended the SoyM to May 2016, by which time they assert that Brazil's environmental governance, such as the increased enforcement and national implementation of the Rural Environmental Registry of private properties (Portuguese acronym CAR) mandated by the Forest Code (FC) (1), will be robust enough to justify ending the agreement (2). We argue that a longer-term commitment is needed to help maintain deforestation-free soy supply chains, as full compliance and enforcement of these regulations is likely years away. Ending the SoyM prematurely would risk a return to deforestation for soy expansion at a time when companies are committing to zero-deforestation supply chains (3).

Access the full article

View all access options to continue reading this article.

Supplementary Material

File (aaa0181.gibbs.sm.pdf)
File (aaa0181.gibbs.sm.revision1.pdf)
File (aaa0181.gibbs.sm.revision2.pdf)
File (aaa0181.gibbs.sm.revision3.pdf)
File (amazon_annualsoy_2001_to_2014.zip)
File (cerrado_annualcrop_2001_to_2013.zip)

References and Notes

1
Soares-Filho B., et al., Science 344, 363 (2014).
2
Brazilian Vegetable Oil Industries Association, New agenda for soybeans in the Amazon biome (ABIOVE, São Paulo, 2014); www.abiove.com.br.
3
United Nations, New York Declaration on Forests (UN, New York, 2014); http://bit.ly/1KmeuRW.
4
Morton D. C., et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103, 14637 (2006).
5
Macedo M. N., et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 1341 (2012).
6
Rudorff B. F. T., et al., Remote Sens. 3, 185 (2011).
7
Rocha G. F., et al., Rev. Bras. Cartogr. 63, 341 (2011).
8
Azevedo A. A., et al., Boletim Amazonia em Pauta 3, 1 (IPAM, Brasilia, 2014); http://bit.ly/17j4REk.
9
Rajao R., et al., Public Adm. Dev. 32, 229 (2012).
10
In Pará, one-third of this was in INCRA settlements.
11
Borner J., et al., Glob. Environ. Change 29, 294 (2014).
12
Lambin E. F., et al., Glob. Environ. Change 23, 892 (2013).
13
Strassburg B. B., et al., Glob. Environ. Change 28, 84 (2014).
14
Nepstad D., et al., Science 344, 1118 (2014).

(0)eLetters

eLetters is a forum for ongoing peer review. eLetters are not edited, proofread, or indexed, but they are screened. eLetters should provide substantive and scholarly commentary on the article. Neither embedded figures nor equations with special characters can be submitted, and we discourage the use of figures and equations within eLetters in general. If a figure or equation is essential, please include within the text of the eLetter a link to the figure, equation, or full text with special characters at a public repository with versioning, such as Zenodo. Please read our Terms of Service before submitting an eLetter.

Log In to Submit a Response

No eLetters have been published for this article yet.

ScienceAdviser

Get Science’s award-winning newsletter with the latest news, commentary, and research, free to your inbox daily.