Deforestation

Authors: Friederike Fitschen, Malte Südema, Niklas Kirschke, August 31. 2024   

1 Definition and Relevance

1.1 Definition

Deforestation refers to the clearing of forests and the utilisation of the freed-up land for another purpose. Runyan and D’Odorico define deforestation as follows:
„The conversion of forest to another land use or the long-term reduction of the tree canopy cover below a 10% threshold. Deforestation implies the long-term or permanent loss of forest cover and its transformation into another land use.“1
The definition describes that deforestation is not just the simple felling of trees, but the destruction of the entire forest ecosystem. This also illustrates the difference to traditional forestry, as the latter utilises the existing forest economically, but also maintains and cultivates it 2.
The impact of deforestation ranges from local changes, such as the reduction of biodiversity, the deterioration of groundwater quality and soils, to global impacts caused by the release of large amounts of carbon hydroxide, which has been stored in the biomass of the trees 3.
1.2 Relevance
Forests cover around 31 percent of the world’s land mass 4. The benefits and influence of these ecosystems on the environment and humans are diverse and far-reaching. The direct utilisation of the forest through the use of wood as construction and fuel or non-timber forest products (NTFP) 5, as a habitat for flora and fauna 6 or as a tourist area 7 are significant added values that the forest can offer. But also, the indirect benefits of the forest on water and soil quality 8, the storage of CO2 9 or the improvement in the quality of life of people 10 who live near a forest are important aspects that speak in favour of preserving a forest and justify the need for its conservation. 11
However, it is estimated that around 130,000 square kilometres of forest are cut down every year 12 without this area being compensated for by new plantations, which is roughly equivalent to the area of Greece.

A red colour indicates a loss of forest area, green an increase and striped means that no data has been published 13.
Figure 1 shows that large areas in South America, South-East Asia and South-West Africa are being deforested and used for new purposes. Rainforests such as the Amazon and Indonesia’s are severely affected by deforestation and have already lost large parts of their area. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), the area of rainforest in Indonesia has decreased by around a quarter between 1990 and 2020 14. In the same period, the Amazon has lost an area of 100 million hectares in Brazil alone. This is roughly the area of Indonesia’s entire rainforest. According to research, around 26 per cent of the Amazon rainforest has already been lost 15. This shows the extreme extent to which deforestation has already affected the tree population. If all rainforests were to be cut down, this would have a similar effect on climate change as the consumption of fossil fuels since 1850 16. In addition, two thirds of the world’s biodiversity can be found in rainforests, which are threatened by deforestation. This in turn has a major impact on the food chains of living organisms and has a negative impact on the environment 17. Despite the high relevance not only of tropical forests but of forests in every part of the world, they are being cut down for land use or suffer from the fact that the original forest areas suffer from increased susceptibility to extreme weather events or parasites due to reforestation with monocultures, as the example of the Harz Mountains in Germany shows. This forest was reforested with fir trees after the original deciduous tree population was cut down but has lost a considerable part of its tree population due to the infestation of the bark beetle 18. This shows how difficult reforestation of lost forest can be. Therefore, deforestation is irreparable in the medium term and should not happen in the first place if possible.

2 Sustainability Analysis

The following chapter begins by analysing the historical development of deforestation. In addition, the influence of companies on deforestation is presented, along with measurements of deforestation and the measures taken by, for example, the EU to reduce deforestation. Finally, the role of certification systems, especially for companies, is analysed.

2.1 Historical overview of deforestation

Deforestation has not just been taking place for a few decades. In general, Western and Central Europe were only slightly deforested around 1000 BC. Around 300 BC 1 – during the time of the Roman and Greek empires – the regional climate was permanently changed by deforestation. Forest areas in the Mediterranean region had already been extensively cleared 2000 years ago. On the one hand, this served to gain agricultural land, but on the other hand, wood was also an important building material for ships and houses. 19 The increase in population also supported the process of deforestation 1. The result was the extensive deforestation of the Mediterranean region 19. After the fall of the Roman and Greek empires, however, the forests were able to recover 1.
The next decline in forest areas in Europe took place between the 11th and 13th centuries and coincided also with the rise of feudal societies. Population increased, which led to a massive expansion of agriculture and therefore to deforestation. With the outbreak of the Black Death and the resulting decline in population, deforestation stopped and even led to afforestation. In addition, technological progress meant that agricultural land could be utilised more intensively 20. After the population rose again, the loss of forest areas also increased again. Especially before the industrial revolution in the 19th century, many forest areas were lost for agricultural use in Europe and the highest deforestation rates were reached. 1
In the US, large-scale deforestation began later than in Europe. In the 18th and 19th centuries in particular, European colonialists cleared many areas of forest in North America to create farmland and settlement areas 20. The construction of the American Railroad also played an important role in the severe damage to the forests. Between 1840 and 1910, the number of railroad tracks increased from 3,000 miles to 240,000 miles. Wood was the raw material most needed for the construction of the railroad. Apart from the locomotives and rails, most other components were made of wood. These included wagons and railway stations, as well as bridges and fences. The crossties that supported the railroad system were also made of wood and had to be replaced regularly due to environmental influences. In 1900 alone, more than 15 million acres of forest were cut down just to replace wooden railroad crossties. 21
Today, deforestation particularly affects rainforest areas, especially in South America and Southeast Asia. Deforestation in the tropical rainforests is particularly worrying because these forests are home to a large proportion of the world’s biodiversity. In the Amazon region alone, around 17 percent of the forest has been lost in the last 50 years. 22

2.2 Sustainability Impact

The influence of companies on deforestation is considerable. At least 50 percent of global deforestation can be attributed to industrial agriculture, with the cultivation of oil palms and soya beans playing a particularly important role. This is also reflected in the consumption of goods in the EU. The deforested areas are used to produce 34 percent palm oil and 32.8 percent soya, as well as wood, cocoa, coffee, rubber and maize, which are exported to the EU. Livestock farming accounts for around 40 percent of global deforestation. 23 The role of cattle breeding is particularly significant in Brazil. The government support programmes, for example in Pará, have greatly increased the size of cattle herds. Although the interest of companies in cattle breeding has declined in northern Brazil, cattle breeding is still very attractive for small farms, and they are no less keen to convert tropical rainforest into pasture land than large farms. Between 1987 and 1995, the livestock population in northern Brazil increased by 21.6 percent, which equates to around 10 percent of the national total. 24 Brazil is the world’s leading exporter of beef – in 2023, more than 2.7 million tonnes of beef were exported 25.
The use of cleared forest areas in South America for livestock farming is closely linked to the production of soya. Some farmers use the production of both commodities to reduce their dependence on world market prices, depending on which product is more profitable. Tropical forest areas and savannahs in South America have developed into important expansion areas, particularly with regard to the production of beef and soya beans, due to favourable climatic conditions, rising agricultural commodity prices and increasing integration into world markets. 26
Mining is also a cause of deforestation. Mining-related deforestation can be observed in all regions of the world. Indonesia is the country that clears the most forest areas for mining worldwide. Most coal mining takes place in Indonesia, where 57 percent of coal-related deforestation occurred between 2000 and 2019 alone. However, gold is the commodity that causes the greatest direct deforestation due to the expansion of mining areas. In contrast to coal, however, gold mining is spread across several different countries – including Peru, Brazil, Russia and Suriname. Almost 60 percent of gold-related deforestation takes place in these countries. The trend of forest loss due to gold mining has been increasing in recent years. The demand for the raw materials that are extracted from the cleared forest areas can be allocated to various sectors. Construction activities are at the top of the list, followed by the automotive industry, machinery and equipment and computers and electronic products. The biggest drivers of deforestation through mining are China, the EU and the US. 27
This points out that the industrial utilisation and production of goods on the cleared forest areas also plays an important role for the local economy and that demand for the goods is high worldwide.
However, in addition to the positive aspects of deforestation for local industry and agriculture and the fulfilment of global demand for goods, the extremely negative consequences for the environment must also be considered.
Forests fulfil essential ecological functions and serve the ecosystem to a considerable extent – climate regulation, the provision of habitat, the protection of water and soil, the preservation of biodiversity and the sequestration of carbon are just some of the functions of forests. Natural and especially anthropogenic disturbances impair the functioning of this ecosystem. 28 One example of this is the threat to great apes in Africa. Around a third of the great apes are severely threatened by mining, particularly in West Africa. Biodiversity has been severely impacted by deforestation and mining activities. 29
Deforestation also leads to more carbon being released into the atmosphere. During photosynthesis, trees absorb CO2 from the atmosphere and convert it into carbon and oxygen. Trees use the carbon for their growth, and it is bound in the wood. Oxygen is released back into the atmosphere. If forest areas are cleared, some of the carbon is released into the atmosphere. When trees rot, this happens over a longer period of time; when they are burnt, carbon is released within a short period of time. 30 This results in an increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere 31.

2.3 Measurement

In order to reduce emissions and the global release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere due to deforestation, technical options for monitoring deforestation and estimating emissions must also be utilised.
Changes in forest areas can be measured by analysing remote sensing data in addition to ground-based observations. Remote sensing comprises data collected by sensors on aeroplanes or space-based platforms. Data from space has been collected since the early 1990s. 32
Satellite images do not directly measure the height and density of trees, but rather the electromagnetic energy emitted from the ground. As different types of vegetation absorb and reflect the sun’s radiation to different degrees, these differences can be used to make statements about the type of land cover. 33
There are essentially three suitable methods for monitoring deforestation in a technically reliable way – firstly the visual interpretation of aerial or satellite images, secondly the digital analysis of these images and thirdly the analysis of hot-spots, i.e. places where rapid and serious changes have become visible. 32
Although the visual interpretation of the images is labour-intensive, it does not require extensive computer resources. In countries with highly developed data collection capabilities, digital analysis with automated analyses of satellite or aerial images is a viable option. Large-scale deforestation can already be recognised on medium-resolution images, but high-resolution images are required to identify deforestation of 0.5-1 ha. Furthermore, the seasonal changes of the forests must be taken into account when analysing the images and the availability of cloud-free images is not given at all times. 32
The combination of measurements of changes in forest areas and estimates of changes in carbon stocks can make it possible to estimate the emissions caused by deforestation. 32
However, a major challenge in measuring deforestation is the comparability of the data, as the very definition of the term ‘forest’ is interpreted differently. 33
The REDD+ Framework of the UNFCCC represents the framework of the joint endeavour to reduce deforestation and forest degradation at international level and includes climate protection measures in the forestry sector and is part of the Paris Agreement. Around 60 developing countries are already implementing these measures. REDD+ provides a holistic framework and includes activities to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation as well as activities to conserve forest carbon stocks, sustainably manage forests and enhance forest carbon stocks. Countries that can demonstrate result-orientated measures can apply for and receive payments for the implementation of the REDD+ Framework. 34
There are also projects in the EU that call on member states to implement sustainable measures to protect forests. A new EU regulation on deforestation-free products came into force on 29 June 2023 and will apply from 30 December 2024. The aim is to ensure deforestation-free supply chains. The regulation contains rules on certain raw materials for import, export and making available on the Union market. These commodities are cattle, cocoa, coffee, oil palms, rubber, soya and wood. Relevant products are therefore products that contain relevant raw materials, are fed with them or were produced using them. Both the import of relevant raw materials and the use of relevant products may only be placed on the market, made available on the EU market or exported if, firstly, they are deforestation-free, secondly, they have been produced in accordance with the relevant legislation of the country of origin and, thirdly, a due diligence declaration has been submitted. Operators must therefore fulfil their due diligence obligations before they can place relevant products on the market or export them. The submission of due diligence declarations will therefore become mandatory with this EU regulation 35. Furthermore, the European Commission will assess the risk of deforestation and forest degradation in a country or region and assign them a low, medium or high risk. Reduced due diligence obligations will then apply to raw materials and products from low-risk countries, although companies with more complex supply chains will also have to check products from these countries and document whether certain risks exist. 35
The Global Forest Watch platform 36, which provides data and information on deforestation areas almost in real time, can be used to gain an impression of the exact regions where deforestation is taking place and where deforestation hotspots can be localised 36. This can be of great relevance for the choice of suppliers within the supply chain of companies, also with regard to the requirements of the new EU regulation.
A company can also use certificates to prove its commitment to protecting forests and demonstrate its performance in terms of sustainability.
In addition to numerous other certifications, the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) exists for forest management. It was founded in 1993 to promote the environmentally friendly, socially beneficial and economically viable management of forests as part of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro and FSC is now represented in almost 90 countries. The FSC system not only safeguards paper products and furniture. Tyres and clothing, among other things, can also be certified by FSC. 37 The certification is based on 10 principles, including compliance with laws, relationships with the local population and impact on the environment. 38
There are three different labels. The FSC 100% label proves that all materials used come from FSC-certified forests. FSC Recycled means that products with this label consist of 100 per cent recycled material. FSC Mix proves that a product consists of a mixture of materials from FSC-certified forests, recycled materials and FSC-controlled wood. It should be noted that FSC-controlled wood does not come from FSC-certified forests. 37
The FSC label is not without controversy. Although the FSC aims to curb deforestation, forestry practices have not been significantly changed 39. This is also evident from the extent of forest loss between 1990 and 2020 – during this time, 420 million hectares of forest were lost through deforestation 23. Furthermore, the monitoring and enforcement of the FSC standards by NGOs is problematic and leads to a decline in the legitimacy of the system. In addition, the certification of tree plantations has been highly controversial. Critics note that tree plantations are monocultures and industrialised agriculture and not well-managed forests, which is what certification was originally intended to support 39.
However, the label makes it possible for companies to measure their performance in terms of preventing deforestation and sustainable forest management. One example of this is the IKEA Group. They have committed to using 100 per cent of their wood from sustainable sources by 2020. At the end of 2013, the company had achieved a share of 32.4 percent, with FSC-certified wood accounting for 28.4 percent. 40 This clearly shows that companies can monitor and measure their performance by producing and using certified products. Labels such as that of the FSC can therefore be used as a key performance indicator for companies, although the weaknesses of the labels must be taken into account.

3 Sustainability Implementation

Companies have a major influence on deforestation, as can already be seen in the causes. However, they can also have a positive effect on the conservation of forests and promote sustainable management. There are several implementations that companies can use to sustainably utilize products from the forest and ensure that the raw materials used have not caused deforestation. As there are certainly incentives for sustainable forest management from a corporate perspective, which are considered in more detail in the following chapter, a range of methods and strategies can be used for successful sustainable production.
The catalogue of possible implementations begins with the establishment of a company-wide sustainability management department, a code of conduct that anchors sustainability as a goal and aspiration in the corporate philosophy, and sustainable supply chain management. More specific are the tools that can be used by the relevant departments to ensure sustainable forest management. This includes the creation of a deforestation risk analysis to uncover potential weaknesses in the supply chain and initiate countermeasures. These countermeasures include, for example, certification to ensure sustainable production, partnerships with local manufacturers or monitoring systems that serve to monitor the forests and thus detect possible deforestation at an early stage. In general, these tools are intended to increase the transparency and traceability of commodities to ensure that no deforestation has taken place in the production chain across all stages. Finally, these findings can be shown via reporting, which can also be used for the external perception of the company in addition to internal benefits by creating public reports.

3.1 General Implementation

General company-wide implementations serve to develop, manage and review the sustainability strategy and its implementation. They therefore not only explicitly serve to prevent deforestation, but also represent the superordinate department in the company to ensure sustainability.

3.1.1 Sustainability Management Department

A Sustainability Management Department (SMD) can play a key role in reducing deforestation 41. The department does not take on specific actions to reduce deforestation, but rather creates company rules that are followed within the company and a general sustainability strategy 42. For example, the SMD can establish rules and a code of conduct to ensure that only deforestation-free raw materials are used or, through Sustainable Product Development 43, to design products that require a low proportion of new wood and rely more on recycled raw materials. To this end, staff can be trained to raise awareness of the impact of deforestation. SMD also takes over the monitoring and reporting of resources. This can identify weak points in the supply chain and reduce the use of raw materials that are linked to deforestation. In addition to these internal company tasks, the department is also responsible for public work, such as publishing transparency reports, cooperating with NGOs and certification organisations and supporting initiatives to combat deforestation.
A best-practice example of this is the IKEA Group, which appointed a CSO back in 2011 and now employs a sustainability department. This is divided into four groups that deal with communication, innovative solutions, policy improved guidelines and staff training. In addition, the IKEA Group follows the IKEA Way on Purchasing Products, Materials and Services as a company-wide code of conduct. This contains the minimum acceptable standard for working conditions and environmental protection. In addition to the code of conduct, the IKEA Group has also implemented a forestry standard that prohibits the use of illegally harvested wood, as well as wood that does not come from sources where deforestation leads to social conflict, from natural forests that are worth protecting or from forests with genetically modified trees. In addition, the IKEA Forestry Standard specifies that wood may only come from sources with FSC certification or from pre- and post-consumer reclaimed wood. 40 These policies drawn up by the company have led to the IKEA Group sourcing 100 per cent of its wood from sustainable sources. Investments have also been made in the development of better particle boards to reduce resource consumption and transport costs. As a result, 30 per cent of the resources used for wood and glue have been saved and the weight has also been reduced by 30 per cent. In addition, the products have been adapted so that around 80 per cent of products now use particle boards as components. These measures have also enabled the IKEA Group to reduce production costs by 20 per cent. This shows that sustainable wood product development can also result in economic benefits. 40

3.1.2 Sustainable Supply Chain Management

Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) can be used to coordinate specific actions to reduce the use of raw materials from deforestation 44. This ensures the sustainable and deforestation-free sourcing of wood. To achieve this, wood can only be procured from certified sources. In addition, suppliers are assessed by the SSCM and checked to ensure that the standards are met. To ensure the deforestation-free sourcing of wood, traceability is also a core task of this department in order to avoid or uncover illegal deforestation. The SSCM also coordinates cooperation with local suppliers and their training. In addition to the procurement of wood, its use can also be adapted. For example, components can be replaced with more sustainable ones during the manufacturing process. By reducing the number of solid wood components and using recycled materials 45, wood consumption can be reduced and deforestation counteracted.

3.2 Specific Implementation

To ensure that no deforestation has been part of the resource procurement process, there are several methods that can be used by companies. These are essentially the procedures that can be applied by the relevant departments of the company.

3.2.1 Deforestation Risk Analysis

Firstly, the potential deforestation risks must be recognised by the company. To do this systematically and thus minimise the risks, a deforestation risk analysis or deforestation risk assessment can be carried out. To do this, all products and manufacturing steps along the supply chain are first analysed to determine whether they pose a potential risk of deforestation. Once the potential risk areas have been identified, an assessment is made as to whether they cause deforestation. In particular, raw materials such as soya, cocoa, coffee, beef, palm oil and wood must be thoroughly analysed during the assessment. In addition, the identification process also determines which areas should be under special observation in the future to ensure that they do not pose a risk in the future. Once potential risks have been identified, the effects are analysed. Various aspects, such as legal, reputation or profitability, are analysed. Finally, possible countermeasures are developed and planned to reduce or eliminate the risks. This process should be repeated at regular intervals in order to recognise risks at an early stage and initiate measures. 46

3.2.2 Certificates

Various certificates are available to certify by an independent institution that no forests have been cut down by the resources used. However, there are many different certificates for different raw materials. The FSC and PEFC 47 certificates certify that wood comes from sustainable cultivation. At the same time, these are the most widespread in this area. A large number of companies have already committed to sourcing only wood from such certified forests, such as IKEA, Tetra Pak or Kimberly-Clark, but also companies that are not directly associated with wood processing, such as H&M for the production of their shopping bags.
However, as agricultural products also account for a large proportion of global deforestation, various certificates are also available for this sector of the economy to ensure sustainable procurement. A large number of certificates can be found in this area for different products, such as the cultivation of soya, coffee, cocoa, palm oil or livestock farming. The following table shows a non-exhaustive list of different certificates for the corresponding products. Other certificates not listed in these areas are often region-specific, such as Soya-Plus in Brazil.

General certificates, such as those from Naturland 47, the Rainforest Alliance 48 or the International Sustainability and Carbon Certification 49 also offer companies the opportunity to cover a wide range of resources.

3.2.3 Local Partnerships

Another way for companies to ensure deforestation-free sourcing of resources is through partnerships with local producers. This offers companies the opportunity to support producers in their production so that they do not cut down forests due to economic pressure, or to train producers on how to improve their cultivation to operate sustainably. An example of such an implementation is the Cacao Life 50 programme by Mondelēz International, which works with local cocoa farmers to reduce illegal deforestation. Another example from the paper industry is Smurfit Kappa’s collaboration with local communities in the Netherlands to reuse waste paper and thus reduce raw material requirements and use less wood 45,51. However, working with local producers also requires higher costs for the company, as production and compliance with regulations require monitoring and recurring inspections.

3.2.4 Monitoring Systems

Monitoring systems used by companies themselves can also help to ensure compliance with regulations. This can be used in addition to the certificates to avoid relying solely on the certification bodies. This is also necessary when working with local partners, as in this case only monitoring is carried out by the company. However, as already mentioned in Chapter 2 – Measurements, monitoring deforestation is not easy to implement. One possibility is to implement your own systems using satellite and radar data to detect changes in the forests used. In the same way, field validation can be carried out in which employees on site ensure that no forest has been cut down. However, this is associated with a high investment of resources by the company. It is also possible to work with local NGOs, which take over the monitoring and report anomalies.
Another approach is to embed existing monitoring systems that can be integrated into the supply chain. For example, the IBM Food Trust 52, which is part of the IBM Supply Chain Intelligence Suite, can be used for the agricultural sector, Trase 53 or Global Forest Watch Pro 54 as a general application. Another advantage of integrated tools is that automatic reports can be created that can be used internally and externally for reporting purposes, thus simplifying the transparency and traceability of resources.
These methods enable companies to track the origin and progress of resources right back to the source and thus ensure that the resources come from sustainable cultivation. In addition, forest monitoring can also ensure that no deforestation is taking place. However, it must be remembered that monitoring is only as good as the techniques used for it.

4 Drivers and Barriers

Deforestation is an enormous burden on the climate and is primarily driven by agriculture, mining, urban expansion, etc. 55. In order to better understand the extent of global deforestation and to gain an overview of how challenging it is to reduce it, as well as to show what opportunities exist and are being used to reduce it, a comprehensive analysis of drivers and barriers to deforestation is required. The drivers and barriers of efforts to reduce deforestation are now analyzed in more detail to avoid a misleading form of presentation. Although typical drivers and barriers of climate change, such as increasing political pressure for sustainable behavior, also apply to deforestation, this analysis focuses primarily on specific indicators of deforestation to avoid redundancies. Furthermore, the drivers and barriers are sorted according to the categories political, economic, social, technological and environmental.

4.1 Drivers

4.1.1 Political Drivers

Both at national and international level, political drivers play an important role in implementing strategies to reduce deforestation. Article 5(2) of the United Nations Paris Agreement encourages Member States to promote the implementation of measures to reduce deforestation 56.
Direct legally binding regulations, however, can be found in the EU Deforestation Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 of May 31, 2023, which replaces its predecessor, the EU Timber Regulation 995/2010, and requires stricter requirements. The EUTR originally prohibited the import of timber products from illegal logging into the EU, Art 4 (EU) RL 995/2010. THE EUDR extends this ban by also imposing import restrictions on cattle, cocoa, coffee, oil palm, rubber and soya and making this subject to the condition that the goods have been produced without deforestation and in accordance with the relevant legislation of the producing country and that a due diligence declaration has been submitted, Art 3 RL (EU) 2023/1115. Furthermore, companies are obliged to implement a due diligence system that records information on the origin of the goods, assesses the risk of deforestation and considers measures to reduce the risk, Art. 9-11 Directive (EU) 2023/1115.
These measures send an important signal to the European market and can establish the demand for sustainable EU consumer goods on the global market 57, even if it does not solve deforestation in the countries of origin. This is because in producing countries it is questionable whether other countries besides the EU also set such requirements for consumer goods. If they do not, there is a risk that the production areas will simply separate and deforestation will continue for products from other buyers 58.
On the production side, land-use policies are used to combat deforestation, among other things. These include, for example, the establishment of protected forest areas, the regulation of forest use or payments for ecosystem services. The effectiveness of these depends on local conditions, whereby functioning governance structures and the involvement of local communities are conducive to the effectiveness of such regulations 59.

4.1.2 Economic Drivers

Land-use policies are particularly effective if their measures provide monetary incentives for those affected 59. Such measures exist, for example, in payment programs for ecosystem services (PES) or the REDD+ framework.
PES are financial incentives in which providers of environmental services (e.g. forest owners) receive money if they carry out activities that maintain or promote the environmental service (e.g. maintaining or reforesting forests instead of clearing them). Such payments are intended to ensure that suppliers’ profits are higher for environmentally friendly practices than for harmful alternatives 60. This is intended to reduce deforestation and at the same time create an alternative source of income, which is necessary to combat deforestation in poorer regions.
In principle, they are also successful in this respect. Although the effects of PES programs are very dependent on location and context, various studies in different places show that they reduce the rate of deforestation 61-63, although the progress is rather low and proves to be inefficient61,63. Poverty is also not significantly reduced 61,62. Nevertheless, a positive trend can be seen, which is also reflected in the fact that such programs sensitize the population to the relevance of forest protection 62. Here, too, it can be seen that assertiveness, active participation of those affected and functioning governance structures are conducive to the implementation of PES programs, while the presence of corruption hinders the implementation of PES programs 61.
However, a study of PES programs in Uganda shows that the reduction of deforestation tends to be short-term and less sustainable in the long term 63. Consequently, although PES represent a mechanism for reducing deforestation, they are not a universal solution.
However, a study of PES programs in Uganda shows that the reduction in deforestation tends to be short-term and is less sustainable in the long term 62. Consequently, although PES represent a mechanism for reducing deforestation, they are not a universal solution.
Another economic driver, which is very similar to PES, is the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) initiative. Anchored in Article 5 (2) of the Paris Agreement, this refers to efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing deforestation and forest degradation. This takes place after a three-stage implementation phase in which a national strategy and an action plan to reduce deforestation is first developed, which is then to be implemented in order to measure progress in the final step and receive result-based payments for the greenhouse gases saved 64. As of 2020, 54 countries have included nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and a total of 9 countries have already saved 8.82 billion tons of CO2 65.
REDD+ therefore has a high potential for reducing deforestation 66. At the same time, however, the same implementation difficulties apply here as with PES, for example. Furthermore, the actual effects of REDD+ have not yet been scientifically proven beyond dispute 67.
There are also economic drivers within companies to reduce deforestation, such as risk minimization to prevent potential reputational damage or violations of regulations such as the EUDR or to counter new market trends. However, CSR also plays a role in the implementation of zero deforestation commitments (ZDC). More than 500 deforestation-related companies have set themselves the goal of eliminating deforestation from their supply chains 68. This is currently being implemented to an inadequate extent with moderate success, particularly due to the complexity of deforestation and supply chains but shows potential for reducing deforestation 68,69. Overall, there are therefore many ecological drivers, but these drivers all have implementation difficulties.

4.1.3 Social Drivers

This is particularly important as deforestation is generally associated with considerable social poverty and injustice in the producing countries 62. Nevertheless, the perception of the problems of deforestation is increasing among those affected, so that they are increasingly speaking out against it 70. Educational attainment is also a decisive factor. The higher the level of education, the more likely people are to position themselves against deforestation 70.

4.1.4 Technological Drivers

Progress in information technology is also particularly relevant when it comes to reducing deforestation 68. For the improvement of supply chains, for the collection of information in accordance with the REDD+ specifications or for protection against illegal deforestation, satellite monitoring and geo-information systems help with the implementation and, despite the restrictions mentioned in 2.3, generally make it possible to include forest areas 71.

4.1.5 Environmental Drivers

Ultimately, the importance of forests in the fight against climate change is also an important driver, as forests play a central role in climate protection as carbon sinks and are a cornerstone of biodiversity 72. Therefore, initiatives for the reforestation of renaturation of degraded areas are also of particular importance 73.

4.2 Barriers

Despite efforts to reduce deforestation, current deforestation rates are very high 74-76. The main reasons for this lie in the barriers to deforestation mitigation.

4.2.1 Economic Barriers

The biggest drivers of deforestation are agriculture – especially the cultivation of wood
agriculture – including the cultivation of wood, palm oil, soy, cocoa, coffee and cattle – followed by illegal logging and the expansion of cities 77. The agricultural sector, which is responsible for the largest share of deforestation 22, is driven by the global demand for these specific products 65. This ensures that there is an economic incentive for deforestation. This is further supported by the fact that the world population is forecast to rise to 10 billion people by 2050 55 and global food production would have to increase significantly to feed such a population 78. It seems inevitable that more arable land will have to be made available. Although the EUDR requires companies to ensure that they source deforestation-free products in the future and in many places, farmers receive PES to preserve forest areas, this does not solve the problem of high demand. In order to meet this demand, alternative cultivation areas and increasing productivity in cultivation are required 78.
Furthermore, there is also a market failure for products associated with deforestation, as externalities such as lower oxygen production due to small forest areas are not included in the price of these products 55.

4.2.2 Political Barriers

In addition to economic barriers, weak state institutions also ensure that deforestation can continue. If there are no land use regulations at all or if they are only weakly enforced or even undermined by corruption, which is more common in less developed countries, this promotes deforestation 79-81. Furthermore, this is also relevant if there are regulations on forest use but at the same time there is a lack of or weak law enforcement. This promotes illegal deforestation and poaching 65.
However, even if strong structures are in place and forest protection laws are enforced, this can have negative consequences. This phenomenon is known as leakage, where sustainability standards are exercised in one place, which then leads to unsustainable activities not being stopped altogether, but instead being relocated elsewhere 82. A simulation of a zero deforestation policy in the Amazonas region of Brazil would predict just such a scenario 78. To avoid this, regions and transnational agreements would be needed, all of which would have to be enforced with the same level of commitment, which in turn would entail a high level of coordination and cooperation.

4.2.3 Social Barriers

In addition, this shift in leakage also poses the risk that jobs that were provided by the agricultural sector, for example, could be lost. This is particularly problematic as there are hardly any alternative sustainable sources of income available, especially in poorer regions, and people in developing countries are more dependent on jobs in agriculture83. In many regions, poor rural communities rely on forest resources for firewood, food and income, which leads to overexploitation and deforestation 84.
Furthermore, urban expansion, especially in Asia, is also an obstacle to deforestation mitigation77. Rising population growth in specific regions increases the demand for land for agriculture, settlements and infrastructure. However, density or poverty are not always the driving force behind deforestation. Rather, it depends on the region and the circumstances prevailing there – such as the enforcement of laws, community management and political influences. This understanding is crucial for the design of management approaches that are both ecologically and socially sustainable and tailored to local conditions 85. The social aspect must not be neglected either. This can also be possible without having to sacrifice sustainability, as a survey on the role of social equity in payments for ecosystem services in Latin America showed that PES that were perceived as fair often also had positive effects in terms of sustainability 62.

4.2.4 Environmental Barriers

Regardless of human activities, climatic conditions must also be considered. Changes in the climate, such as periods of drought or increased precipitation, can have a negative impact on agricultural productivity and thus increase the pressure on deforestation 86. Finally, forest fires, which destroy large areas of forest, are also becoming more frequent. In many countries in the Amazonas rainforest, for example, the number of forest fires per year more than doubled between 2000 and 2023 87.

4.3 Conclusion on Drivers and Barriers

The drivers and barriers of deforestation mitigation are complex and interlinked, with high economic demand, profound policy frameworks, social dynamics, ecological factors and technological developments influencing deforestation and forest degradation in different ways. An effective approach to halting deforestation must therefore take all these factors into account and provide integrated solutions that promote sustainable development and reduce pressure on forests. Such a solution currently seems difficult to find.

References

1 Runyan, C. & D’Odorico, P. Global Deforestation. (Cambridge University Press, 2016).
2 Kirilenko, A. P. & Sedjo, R. A. Climate change impacts on forestry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104, 19697-19702 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701424104
3 Derouin, S. Deforestation: Facts, Causes & Effects. livescience.com (2022).
4 Salas, E. B. Global forest area 1990-2021, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1292175/global-forest-area/ (2024).
5 Guariguata, M. R. et al. Compatibility of timber and non-timber forest product management in natural tropical forests: Perspectives, challenges, and opportunities. Forest Ecology and Management 259, 237-245 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.11.013
6 Clark, J. S. & McLachlan, J. S. Stability of forest biodiversity. Nature 423, 635-638 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01632
7 Essex, S. Forest tourism and recreation: case studies in environmental management – X. Font and J. Tribe. Tourism Management 22 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00041-3
8 Neary, D. G., Ice, G. G. & Jackson, C. R. Linkages between forest soils and water quality and quantity. Forest Ecology and Management 258, 2269-2281 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.05.027
9 Sun, W. & Liu, X. Review on carbon storage estimation of forest ecosystem and applications in China. For. Ecosyst. 7, 4 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-019-0210-2
10 Takayama, N., Morikawa, T. & Bielinis, E. Relation between Psychological Restorativeness and Lifestyle, Quality of Life, Resilience, and Stress-Coping in Forest Settings. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, 1456 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16081456
11 Pearce, D. W. The Economic Value of Forest Ecosystems. Ecosystem Health 7, 284-296 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-0992.2001.01037.x
12 Heino, M. et al. Forest Loss in Protected Areas and Intact Forest Landscapes: A Global Analysis. PLOS ONE 10, e0138918 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138918
13 Ritchie, H. & Roser, M. Deforestation and Forest Loss, https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation (2023).
14 FAO. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020, https://fra-data.fao.org/assessments/fra/2020/IDN/home/overview (2024).
15 Quintanilla, M., Josse, C. & León, A. G. The Amazon against the clock: a Regional Assessment on Where and How to protect 80% by 2025., https://amazonia80x2025.earth/ (2022).
16 Lawrence, D. & Vandecar, K. Effects of tropical deforestation on climate and agriculture. Nature 5, 27-36 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2430
17 Giam, X. Global biodiversity loss from tropical deforestation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 5775-5777 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706264114
18 Fischer, A., Marshall, P. & Camp, A. Disturbances in deciduous temperate forest ecosystems of the northern hemisphere: their effects on both recent and future forest development. Biodivers Conserv 22, 1863-1893 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-013-0525-1
19 Pongratz, J., Raddatz, T., Reick, C. H., Esch, M. & Claussen, M. Radiative forcing from anthropogenic land cover change since A.D. 800. Geophysical Research Letters 36 (2009). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL036394
20 Kaplan, J. O., Krumhardt, K. M. & Zimmermann, N. The prehistoric and preindustrial deforestation of Europe. Quaternary Science Reviews 28, 3016-3034 (2009). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.09.028
21 Forest History Society. Fueling the fires of industrialization, https://foresthistory.org/education/trees-talk-curriculum/fueling-fires-industrialization/essay-fueling-the-fires-of-industrialization/ (2024).
22 WWF. Deforestation and forest degredation, https://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/deforestation-and-forest-degradation (2024).
23 European Parliament. Deforestation: causes and how the EU is tackling it, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20221019STO44561/deforestation-causes-and-how-the-eu-is-tackling-it (2022).
24 Walker, R., Moran, E. & Anselin, L. Deforestation and Cattle Ranching in the Brazilian Amazon: External Capital and Household Processes. World Development 28, 683-699 (2000). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(99)00149-7
25 Statista. Exportmenge der führenden Exportländer von Rindfleisch weltweit in den Jahren 2015 bis 2024, https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/245664/umfrage/fuehrende-exportlaender-von-rindfleisch-weltweit/#:~:text=Brasilien%20zählt%20zu%20den%20größten,2%2C85%20Millionen%20Tonnen%20Rindfleisch (2024).
26 Fehlenberg, V. et al. The role of soybean production as an underlying driver of deforestation in the South American Chaco. Global Environmental Change 45, 24-34 (2017). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.05.001
27 Kramer, M. et al. Extracted Forests: Unearthing the role of mining-related deforestation as a driver of global deforestation, https://wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/wwf_studie_extracted_forests_1_1.pdf (2023).
28 Boubekraoui, H., Maouni, Y., Ghallab, A., Draoui, M. & Maouni, A. Spatio-temporal analysis and identification of deforestation hotspots in the Moroccan western Rif. Trees, Forests and People 12 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2023.100388
29 Junker, J. et al. Threat of mining to African great apes. Science Advances 10 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adl0335
30 Gorte, R. W. & Sheikh, P. A. Deforestation and Climate Change, https://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/crs/R41144.pdf (2010).
31 de Abreu dos Santos, D., Rocha Lopes, T., Martins Damaceno, F. & Nascimento Duarte, S. Evaluation of deforestation, climate change and CO2 emissions in the Amazon biome using the Moran Index. Journal of South American Earth Sciences 143 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2024.105010
32 DeFries, R. et al. Earth observations for estimating greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation in developing countries. Environmental Science & Policy 10, 385-394 (2007). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.01.010
33 Andersen, L. E. et al. Why is it so difficult to measure deforestation?, https://www.conservation-strategy.org/news/why-it-so-difficult-measure-deforestation (2023).
34 Cabral, B. F. et al. Amazon deforestation: A dangerous future indicated by patterns and trajectories in a hotspot of forest destruction in Brazil. Journal of Environmental Management 354, 120354 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120354
35 European Parliament. REGULATION (EU) 2023/1115, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32023R1115 (2023).
36 Global Forest Watch. Forest Monitoring Designed for Action, https://www.globalforestwatch.org (2024).
37 Forest Stewardship Council. What’s in a label?, https://fsc.org/en/what-the-fsc-labels-mean (2024).
38 Forest Stewardship Council. 10 Regeln für den FSC-Wald. Diese Prinzipien gelten weltweit, https://www.fsc-deutschland.de/was-ist-fsc/fsc-prinzipien/ (2024).
39 Moog, S., Spicer, A. & Böhm, S. The Politics of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: The Crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council. J Bus Ethics 128, 469-493 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-2033-3
40 Brims, D. V. N. Sustainability at IKEA – Value chain analysis study. (2016).
41 Deloitte. Nachhaltigkeit als strategische Aufgabe für Konzerne und Mittelstand, https://www2.deloitte.com/de/de/pages/trends/nachhaltigkeit-konzerne-und-mittelstand.html (2021).
42 Loew, T. & Rohde, F. CSR und Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement. Definitionen, Ansätze und organisatorische Umsetzung im Unternehmen. (2013).
43 Alänge, S., Clancy, G. & Marmgren, M. Naturalizing sustainability in product development: A comparative analysis of IKEA and SCA. Journal of Cleaner Production 135, 1009-1022 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.148
44 Seuring, S. & Müller, M. From a Literature Review to a Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Supply Chain Management. Journal of Cleaner Production 16, 1699-1710 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.020
45 Smurfit-Kappa. Sustainability Reporting Smurfit Kappa, https://www.smurfitkappa.com/de/sustainability/reporting (2023).
46 Fuchs, M. V. G., M. A guideline on the use of deforestation risk mitigation, (2023).
47 Fetz, C. PEFC, https://www.pefc.de/ (2024).
48 Gowland, S. Rainforest Alliance, https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/de/ (2024).
49 Höring, K. International Sustainability and Carbon Certification. (2024).
50 Cacoa-Life. Cocoa Life, https://de.cocoalife.org/ (2024).
51 Carlos Carpio-Aguilar, J. & Franco-García, M.-L. Joint environmental policy making and sustainable practices for the cardboard production: Case study: Smurfit Kappa. Management Research Review 36, 1220-1237 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-06-2013-0151
52 IBM. IBM Supply Chain Intelligence Suite – Food Trust, https://www.ibm.com/de-de/products/supply-chain-intelligence-suite/food-trust (2024).
53 Trase. Trase – Insights and analysis on commodity trade sustainability. trase.earth (2024).
54 Global Forest Watch Pro. Global Forest Watch Pro. (2024).
55 European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Impact assessment minimising the risk of deforestation and forest degradation associated with products
placed on the EU market. (2021).
56 United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change. Paris Climate Change Conference – November 2015. (2015).
57 Verhaeghe, E. & Ramcilovic-Suominen, S. Transformation or more of the same? The EU’s deforestation-free products regulation through a radical transformation lens. Environmental Science & Policy 158, 103807 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103807
58 Köthke, M., Lippe, M. & Elsasser, P. Comparing the former EUTR and upcoming EUDR: Some implications for private sector and authorities. Forest Policy and Economics 157, 103079 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103079
59 Börner, J., Schulz, D., Wunder, S. & Pfaff, A. The Effectiveness of Forest Conservation Policies and Programs. Annual Review of Resource Economics 12 2020, 45-64 (2020). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-110119-025703
60 Engel, S. The devil in the detail: a practical guide on designing payments for environmental services. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics 9, 131-177 (2016).
61 Samii, C. et al. Effects of payment for environmental services (PES) on deforestation and poverty in low and middle income countries: a systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews 10, 1-95 (2014).
62 Lliso, B., Pascual, U. & Engel, S. On the role of social equity in payments for ecosystem services in Latin America: A practitioner perspective. Ecological Economics 182, 106928 (2021). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106928
63 Kemigisha, E., Babweteera, F., Mugisha, J. & Angelsen, A. Payment for environmental services to reduce deforestation: Do the positive effects last? Ecological Economics 209, 107840 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107840
64 United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change. What is Redd+?, https://unfccc.int/topics/land-use/workstreams/redd/what-is-redd (
65 FAO. The State of Worlds Forests, biodiversity and people. (2020).
66 Hein, J., Guarin, A., Frommé, E. & Pauw, P. Deforestation and the Paris climate agreement: An assessment of REDD+ in the national climate action plans. Forest Policy and Economics 90, 7-11 (2018). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.01.005
67 Duchelle, A. E., Simonet, G., Sunderlin, W. D. & Wunder, S. What is REDD+ achieving on the ground? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 32, 134-140 (2018). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.07.001
68 Bager, S. L. & Lambin, E. F. How do companies implement their zero-deforestation commitments. Journal of Cleaner Production 375, 134056 (2022). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134056
69 Lambin, E. F. et al. The role of supply-chain initiatives in reducing deforestation. Nature Clim Change 8, 109-116 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-017-0061-1
70 Ferrante, A. & Mouysset, L. Deforestation fight in the sight of Brazilian Amazonas inhabitants. Trees, Forests and People 16, 100533 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2024.100533
71 Finer, M. et al. Combating deforestation: From satellite to intervention. Science 360, 1303-1305 (2018).
72 Sohngen, B. Climate change and forests. Annual Review of Resource Economics 12, 23-43 (2020).
73 Kemppinen, K. M. et al. Global reforestation and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology 34, 1221-1228 (2020).
74 Silva Junior, C. H. L. et al. The Brazilian Amazon deforestation rate in 2020 is the greatest of the decade. Nature Ecology & Evolution 5, 144-145 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01368-x
75 Gallemore, C., Pham, T. T., Hamilton, M. & Munroe, D. K. Vietnam’s Payments for Forest Ecosystem Services scheme’s puzzling role in protecting longstanding forests as deforestation rates rise. Ecological Economics 217, 108078 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.108078
76 Rivas, C. A., Guerrero-Casado, J. & Navarro-Cerrillo, R. M. Functional connectivity across dominant forest ecosystems in Ecuador: A major challenge for a country with a high deforestation rate. Journal for Nature Conservation 78, 126549 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2023.126549
77 Hosonuma, N. et al. An assessment of deforestation and forest degradation drivers in developing countries. Environmental Research Letters 7, 044009 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044009
78 Silva, J. G. d., Almeida, R. B. d. & Carvalho, L. V. An economic analysis of a zero-deforestation policy in the Brazilian Amazon. Ecological Economics 203, 107613 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107613
79 Moreira-Dantas, I. R. & Söder, M. Global deforestation revisited: The role of weak institutions. Land Use Policy 122, 106383 (2022). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106383
80 Basu, A. & Basu, J. P. Impact of forest governance and enforcement on deforestation and forest degradation at the district level: A study in West Bengal State, India. Regional Sustainability 4, 441-452 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsus.2023.11.002
81 Naime, J. et al. Enforcement and inequality in collective PES to reduce tropical deforestation: Effectiveness, efficiency and equity implications. Global Environmental Change 74, 102520 (2022). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102520
82 Lambin, E. F. & Furumo, P. R. Deforestation-free commodity supply chains: myth or reality? Annual Review of Environment and Resources 48, 237-261 (2023).
83 International Labour Organization. EMPLOYMENT, PRODUCTIVITY, AND TRADE IN DEVELOPING-COUNTRY AGRICULTURE, https://www.ilo.org/resource/chapter-1-employment-productivity-and-trade-developing-country-agriculture (2013).
84 Miyamoto, M. Poverty reduction saves forests sustainably: Lessons for deforestation policies. World Development 127, 104746 (2020). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104746
85 Sassen, M., Sheil, D., Giller, K. E. & ter Braak, C. J. F. Complex contexts and dynamic drivers: Understanding four decades of forest loss and recovery in an East African protected area. Biological Conservation 159, 257-268 (2013). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.12.003
86 Malhi, G. S., Kaur, M. & Kaushik, P. Impact of Climate Change on Agriculture and Its Mitigation Strategies: A Review. Sustainability 13, 1318 (2021).
87 INPE. Anzahl der Brände im Amazonas-Regenwald nach Ländern in den Jahren 2000 und 2023, https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1045703/umfrage/waldbraende-in-amazonien-nach-laendern/ (2024).