Green for gold: social and ecological tradeoffs influencing the sustainability of the Brazilian soy industry

Garrett, Rachael; Rausch, Lisa

doi:10.1080/03066150.2015.1010077

Cited by 81 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 115 publications

(161 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Expansion of soy and oil palm, the leading oilseeds, is currently concentrated in tropical countries. This increased production has fueled economic growth by generating income, employment, tax revenues, and foreign exchange [2,3]. However, expansion into forests, savannas, and community lands has also resulted in land conflict, Original content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the potential additionality of certification by the Round table on Responsible Soybeans and the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil

Garrett

Carlson

Rueda

et al. 2016

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the original version the unit labels for RTRS and RSPO in figure 4(b) Adoption were not properly marked as '%' and the values for RSPO adoption were not converted into percentages (e.g. 10 instead of 0.10). The corrected version of figure 4 should read as below. No other values in this figure have changed. AbstractMulti-stakeholder roundtables offering certification programs are promising voluntary governance mechanisms to address sustainability issues associated with international agricultural supply chains. Yet, little is known about whether roundtable certifications confer additionality, the benefits of certification beyond what would be expected from policies and practices currently in place. Here, we examine the potential additionality of the Round table on Responsible Soybeans (RTRS) and the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) in mitigating conversion of native vegetation to cropland. We develop a metric of additionality based on business as usual land cover change dynamics and roundtable standard stringency relative to existing policies. We apply this metric to all countries with RTRS (n=8) and RSPO (n=12) certified production in 2013-2014, as well as countries that have no certified production but are among the top ten global producers in terms of soy (n=2) and oil palm (n=2). We find RSPO and RTRS both have substantially higher levels of stringency than existing national policies except in Brazil and Uruguay. In regions where these certification standards are adopted, the mean estimated rate of tree cover conversion to the target crop is similar for both standards. RTRS has higher mean relative stringency than the RSPO, yet RSPO countries have slightly higher enforcement levels. Therefore, mean potential additionality of RTRS and RSPO is similar across regions. Notably, countries with the highest levels of additionality have some adoption. However, with extremely low adoption rates (0.41% of 2014 global harvested area), RTRS likely has lower impact than RSPO (14%). Like most certification programs, neither roundtable is effectively targeting smallholder producers. To improve natural ecosystem protection, roundtables could target adoption to regions with low levels of environmental governance and high rates of forest-to-cropland conversion.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the potential additionality of certification by the Round table on Responsible Soybeans and the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil

Garrett

Carlson

Rueda

et al. 2016

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The bulk of support for producers stems from the National Rural Credit System, which provides low interest loans for all aspects of farm production including operation, storage, maintenance, and investment (Garrett and Rausch, 2015). Minimum price supports have been established for certain crops, such as soybean and corn, and the government will purchase grains from farmers at this minimum price when market prices plunge (Damico and Nassar, 2007).…”

Section: A12 Existing Brazilian Agricultural and Environmental Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon

Garrett¹,

Gardner²,

Morello³

et al. 2017

E&S

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Tropical forests continue to be plagued by the dual sustainability challenges of deforestation and rural poverty. We seek to understand why many of the farmers living in the Brazilian Amazon, home to the world's largest tropical agricultural-forest frontier, persist in agricultural activities associated with low incomes and high environmental damage. To answer this question, we assess the factors that shape the development and distribution of agricultural activities and farmer well-being in these frontiers. Our study utilizes a uniquely comprehensive social-ecological dataset from two regions in the eastern Brazilian Amazon and employs a novel conceptual framework that highlights the interdependencies between household attributes, agricultural activities, and well-being. We find that livestock production, which yields the lowest per hectare incomes, remains the most prevalent land use in remote areas, but many examples of high income fruit, horticulture, and staple crop production exist on small properties, particularly in peri-urban areas. The transition to more profitable land uses is limited by lagging supply chain infrastructure, social preferences, and the fact that income associated with land use activities is not a primary source of perceived life quality. Instead subjective well-being is more heavily influenced by the nonmonetary attributes of a rural lifestyle (safety, tranquility, community relations, etc.). We conclude that transitions away from low-income land uses in agricultural-forest frontiers of the Brazilian Amazon need not abandon a land-focused vision of development, but will require policies and programs that identify and discriminate households based on a broader set of household assets, cultural attributes, and aspirations than are traditionally applied. At a broader scale, access to distant markets for high value crops must be improved via investments in processing, storage, and marketing infrastructure.

show abstract

“…Yet several realities of modern conservation, and their associated challenges, merit discussion. Conservation strategies and priorities are not determined by a single actor, and instead competing interestsincluding those of farmers, ranchers, corporations, environmentalists, indigenous peoples, and regional and national government agencies-all influence the pattern and rate of agricultural expansion and have different priorities that operate at different scales (Garrett and Rausch 2016, Lenzen et al 2013, Fuchs et al 2011, Soares-Filho et al 2016, Gibbs et al 2015, Cord et al 2017, King et al 2015. Agricultural expansion often follows the spatial configuration of roads or waterways (Soares-Filho et al 2006, Fearnside 2007 or the availability of suitable forestland for conversion, whose suitability depends on the constraints of the agriculturalist and the crop they aim to produce (Ordway et al 2017), which in turn is dependent on local, regional and global market demand for food, fuel and fiber (Pacheco 2012, DeFries et al 2010.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balancing tradeoffs: Reconciling multiple environmental goals when ecosystem services vary regionally

O’Connell

Carlson

Cuadra

et al. 2018

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the planet's dominant land use, agriculture often competes with the preservation of natural systems that provide globally and regionally important ecosystem services. How agriculture impacts ecosystem service delivery varies regionally, among services being considered, and across spatial scales. Here, we assess the tradeoffs between four ecosystem services-agricultural production, carbon storage, biophysical climate regulation, and biodiversity-using as a case study the Amazon, an active frontier of agricultural expansion. We find that the highest values for each of the ecosystem services are concentrated in different regions. Agricultural production potential and carbon storage are highest in the north and west, biodiversity greatest in the west, and climate regulation services most vulnerable to disruption in the south and east. Using a simple optimization model, we find that under scenarios of agricultural expansion that optimize total production across ecosystem services, small increases in priority for one ecosystem service can lead to reductions in other services by as much as 140%. Our results highlight the difficulty of managing landscapes for multiple environmental goals; the approach presented here can be adapted to guide value-laden conservation decisions and identify potential solutions that balance priorities.

show abstract

Green for gold: social and ecological tradeoffs influencing the sustainability of the Brazilian soy industry

Cited by 81 publications

References 115 publications

Assessing the potential additionality of certification by the Round table on Responsible Soybeans and the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil

Assessing the potential additionality of certification by the Round table on Responsible Soybeans and the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil

Explaining the persistence of low income and environmentally degrading land uses in the Brazilian Amazon

Balancing tradeoffs: Reconciling multiple environmental goals when ecosystem services vary regionally

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About