Today is Cerrado Day. Do we have any reason to celebrate?

I was born and raised in Manaus, in the middle of the Amazon Rainforest. The horizon was never far off: I was always surrounded by huge trees, luxuriant vegetation, animals heard but not seen, hidden as they were in the depths of the forest. So, imagine my amazement when I first arrived in the Cerrado for my field work: large open landscapes, impressive wildlife, but also huge monocultures that spread from horizon to horizon. I had never seen so much diversity in ecosystems over such short distances. I was so marked by that contrast and beauty that I decided to continue study and do my best to help protect the Cerrado throughout my career.

The Cerrado is a rich natural ecosystem located in central Brazil. It accounts for about 5% of global biodiversity, despite covering only 0.4% of the Earth’s surface. Many of the plants and animals found there cannot be found anywhere else. It provides essential ecosystem services to us all, such as trapping carbon in its vegetation and soil, and supplying freshwater. Besides this important ecological role, the region is also home to a mix of indigenous peoples and other traditional populations that have been living in this region for centuries.

The Cerrado, however, is also a large agricultural frontier. In the last 30 years or so, about half of its natural vegetation (at least one million km2 or 4 times the size of the UK) has been converted to large scale agriculture for producing commodities such as soy, corn and sugarcane, as well as to create pasture for cattle ranching. In my visits, I saw firsthand the constant struggle between remnants of natural vegetation and encroaching agricultural fields across the landscape.

As with the Amazon Rainforest, the Cerrado has suffered increased destruction and fires in recent years. For example, in 2019, there were more fires in the Cerrado than in the Amazon, though the latter were more widely reported in the media.

The consequences of this destruction are not only local. Given the Cerrado’s critically important biodiversity and the ecosystem services it provides, its degradation affects regional weather patterns, increases the chances of drought, and exacerbates global climate change. The loss of biodiversity also affects wildlife populations, and traditional and local human populations that depend directly on this ecosystem for their livelihoods.

I could go on for hours describing the environmental and social consequences of losing the Cerrado, which include loss of unique species, unbalance of ecosystems, release of huge amounts of carbon to the atmosphere, loss of valuable freshwater reservoirs, loss of the livelihoods of traditional peoples, increase in droughts that would affect cities and agricultural fields, and so on. But many of you are probably aware of the consequences already. So, more importantly here is what you have to do with it and what can be done about it.

Many countries share responsibility for the destruction of incredibly rich ecosystems around the world, such as the Cerrado. The demand for food and other products that are unsustainably produced is one of the main drivers of the destruction of natural ecosystems and associated negative social and environmental impacts. The UK, for example, imports more than half of its food and around 80% of its fibre, requiring over 21 million hectares abroad every year to fulfil its demand for only a few commodities[1] - an area almost the size of the entire country!

The good news is that, if we change our consumer patterns and the set higher requirements for the products we buy we can positively influence a change in the way they are produced, so they don’t cause destruction of nature or impact local populations.

Right now, the UK and the European Union are consulting on new laws that would require businesses to ensure the products they import are not linked to deforestation or conversion of natural ecosystems. These measures won’t work alone, but they are a major first step to ensure we start shifting demand towards products that are produced in an ethical and sustainable way, that is they do not lead to further conversion of natural ecosystems, like the Cerrado nor drive other negative impacts on nature, climate and people.

So, I think that despite the terrible and heart-breaking news about the fires and all the destruction, we may have one reason to cheer up today. Governments are finally waking up to their responsibility and hopefully action will come soon. They need to hear your voice though. Responding to the UK and the EU consultations is critical to ensure they take action to stop contributing to this destruction.

 

You can voice your concerns by responding to the UK consultation here (deadline is the 5th October) and to the European Commission consultation here (deadline is 10th December). 

Go ahead and make yourself heard. Conversion of natural ecosystems, whether forests, savannahs, grasslands or other wildlife-rich places, and human rights abuses in supply chains of the products we consume here, shouldn’t be and aren’t acceptable and we should all take robust action to stop it, including by adopting new laws.

Obviously, this is only the start of the journey, there is a need for more comprehensive action to stop deforestation and conversion, including further action from governments (e.g. collaborate with producer countries, finance sustainable practices), business (e.g. achieve clean supply chains, finance good practices) and citizens (e.g. make the right buying choices, demand action from companies and politicians).

For more information on what else you can do to help, please read the recommendations from our recent report here or, if you live in the UK, visit our call to action webpage.

[1] WWF’s 2020 report: ‘Riskier Business: the UK’s overseas land footprint’ https://www.wwf.org.uk/riskybusiness

*this article was originally posted on my LinkedIn account.

Urgent action is needed to stop the UK’s contribution to the destruction of nature

Who didn’t feel devastated last summer seeing heart-breaking images of fires in the Amazon? 

The world suffered deeply seeing the destruction of the forests and the impacts on wildlife and people that live or depend directly on these ecosystems. Less than a year later, the fires have started again. Only this June, the number of fires was already higher than in June 2019, and actually higher than has been recorded in the past 13 years[1]. The situation is likely to only get worse as we enter dry season in the Amazon.

If this wasn’t enough – other biodiverse habitats around the globe such as the Cerrado in Brazil or peatland forests in West Kalimantan in Indonesia are also being destroyed. 

The ever-increasing demand for commodities to produce the goods we consume daily has a major role in driving this destruction. Besides the Amazon fires, the destruction of nature increases the risk of zoonotic diseases[2] and reduces our ability to mitigate climate change.

Today we published in full our new report done in collaboration with RSPB: Riskier Business: The UK’s overseas land footprint. 

This report provides key new evidence of the UK’s heavy dependence on products and raw materials coming from abroad to meet its demand for food and other items, and on the climate, environmental and human rights risks posed overseas by these imports. 

Key findings are: 

• Over 21 million hectares of land in other countries – that’s equivalent to 88% of the UK’s land area – were required, between 2016 and 2018, to produce just 7 commodities used and consumed in the UK (i.e. beef & leather, cocoa, palm oil, pulp & paper, rubber, soy and timber). 
• An area nearly 3 times the size of Wales (around 6 million hectares), was required for commodity production in countries with high biodiversity, high rates of nature destruction, poor track records on labour rights and/or weak rule of law, such as Brazil, Indonesia and Ivory Coast.
• Over 2,800 species, already under threat in high risk producer countries[3], could be under pressure from UK trade in key high deforestation risk commodities.
• At least 28 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent were emitted annually, between 2011 and 2018, to produce the amount of cocoa, palm oil, rubber and soy imported to the UK.

In 2018, as part of its 25-Year Environment Plan, the UK Government promised to reduce the UK’s footprint overseas. Since then it has created the independent Global Resource Initiative (GRI) Task Force, that submitted a set of ambitious recommendations to the UK Government in a report published in March 2020. 

However, the government has not yet responded to the GRI Task Force’s recommendations and does not plan to do so until October 2020 at the earliest. In the meantime, actions that the GRI Task Force recommends, such as establishing a mandatory due diligence obligation for businesses to identify, mitigate and report on their overseas environmental footprint, and the setting of a deforestation-free supply chain target, are at risk of being excluded from the Environment Bill, currently before Parliament. 

The government has a key role to play in driving action within business and financial institutions, and by setting a global example of leadership. Legislation to secure deforestation- and conversion-free supply chains is urgently needed, as are comprehensive policy and other legal measures, such as trade agreements, to ensure that the UK stops taking part in the destruction of nature and climate change, both domestically and overseas.

That’s why WWF and RSPB are calling on government to urgently:

• Implement an ambitious action plan in response to the GRI task force recommendations, going beyond these where necessary to address the issues highlighted in Riskier Business.

• Establish a mandatory due diligence obligation on businesses and financial institutions through the Environment Bill.

• Secure high environmental and social standards and safeguards in new UK trade agreements.

• By the end of 2020, set a time-bound, legally binding target to halve the UK’s overall environmental footprint by 2030, including a sub-target to halt deforestation and conversion embedded within UK's commodity supply chains as early as possible and no later than 2023.

The UK Government will only act if they hear from us. Support our campaign, starting by calling for new trade deals that don't put nature at risk: Don't let our government fuel the fires | WWF, and by asking your MP to support new legislation to remove deforestation from UK supply chains.

This article was originally published on my LinkedIn account.

Healthy ecosystems mean healthy people

Have we finally started understanding that “a diverse, healthy, resilient and productive natural environment is the basis for a prosperous, just and safe future for humanity”¹?

When we can answer yes, conservation actions will be strengthened and finally become a priority. Unfortunately, this is not yet a reality. While there are many examples of effective conservation programmes, efforts to preserve nature remain insufficient. The Living Planet Index uses population data of monitored animals and plants around the world to analyse their trajectories through time. The results of the Index are presented yearly in a report – the Living Planet Report (LPR). The recently published LPR (2016) announced that there has been widespread habitat destruction and biodiversity loss over the last 40 years. Habitat loss and land degradation are the main causes of species extinctions, according to the report.

There has been considerable species extinction in general. For example, 58% of known vertebrate species (amphibians, fishes, mammals and reptiles) have disappeared between 1970 and 2012, with the extinction rate doubling in the last 15 years. Little is known about invertebrates because data is lacking.

Tropical forests that contain a large portion of biodiversity on Earth, have experienced the greatest conversion rates, showing a 41% decline in species from 1970 to 2009. In the same period, grasslands have experienced a loss of 18% of species.

The Brazilian Cerrado² was highlighted as one of the most overexploited regions in the world, having lost about half of its original land area. The high consumption of meat, for example, is closely linked to the expansion of soybean plantations and has resulted in large vegetation loss in the Cerrado. High meat consumption is driven both by internal demand and by international markets. In addition to the land conversion, there is an alarming number of plans for building dams in the region. The situation of the Cerrado is concerning because of its unique flora and fauna and its importance for local and regional hydrological cycles^3,4. If land-use change and land degradation continue to occur at the current rate, over 30% of species present in the Cerrado will become extinct in the near future.

(Left corner) Map of South America highlighting the original extent of the Brazilian Cerrado. (right) Large-scale farming common in the landscape. Photo credit: Antonio Costa.   

In my opinion, the most compelling message in the LPR is not about species losses but about losses in ecosystem services — benefits provided by nature for human population⁵ — that have been caused by species extinctions and land-use change. Loss or scarcity of ecosystem services directly affects our well-being, reducing our quality of life. For example, a reduction in the quantity or quality of water provided by water bodies would have a direct detrimental effect on our health. Moreover, the loss of biodiversity decreases the resilience of ecosystems, which become more vulnerable to further disturbances. This vulnerability can result in unbalanced ecosystem processes, i.e., processes that move nutrients, energy and water within the ecosystem and out of it, and result in further losses of ecosystem services. We have trapped ourselves in a vicious cycle with dire consequences for all life on Earth, including our own!

Despite the bad news, there is still hope. And we know the way out: reduce pressure on nature. By changing our patterns of consumption, we can reverse the situation. The solution has to come from both governments and individuals. Viable solutions for sustainable production and trade must be global: they have to result from collaboration among nations. In our globalised world, everything is linked: for example, meat consumption in the US and Europe drives deforestation in the Cerrado. We must consume resources sustainably and guarantee equitable access to resources among both developed and less developed nations. The LPR also mentions innovative sustainable ways of farming and energy production as feasible alternatives. Citizens must also take their responsibility by choosing lifestyles that have a low carbon footprint.

Sustainable consumption logo by Journal of Marketing Management 

We have the power to build a healthy economy based on the sustainable use of Earth's resources. For our sake, we must start now to find ways to maintain healthy natural ecosystems.

¹from the Living Planet Report 2016, page 6.

³Malhado A.C.M., Pires G.F., & Costa M.H. (2010) Cerrado Conservation is Essential to Protect the Amazon Rainforest. AMBIO, 39, 580–584.

⁴Spera S.A., Galford G.L., Coe M.T., Macedo M.N., & Mustard J.F. (2016) Land-use change affects water recycling in Brazil’s last agricultural frontier. Global Change Biology, 22, 3405–3413.