Browse all documents

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This case study analyzes the sensitivity of sustainability classifications for rural credit in Brazil, comparing five different taxonomies and initiatives applied to data from the BCB's SICOR system between July 2015 and June 2023.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The volume of rural credit in Brazil classified as sustainable varies significantly depending on the chosen framework. For the 2022/23 agricultural year, the proportion of sustainable credit ranged from 1% when using subprograms explicitly associated with the SPSABC to 44% when using MAPA's SPAS.
  • Between the 2018/19 and 2022/23 agricultural years, total rural financing in Brazil increased by 64% in real terms, rising from R$173.19 billion to R$358.67 billion. During this same period, credit aligned with certain sustainability criteria grew more than proportionally: MAPA's SPAS increased by 103%, the Climate Bonds Taxonomy by 96%, and the BCB Public Consultation no. 82/2021 criteria by 209%.
  • The increase in credit classified as sustainable under the BCB's criteria from 2019/20 onwards is primarily attributed to a growing number of operations reporting "No-till Farming" in the "Type of Crop" field and "Minimum Cultivation" in the "Type of Cultivation" field within the SICOR system.
  • The study highlights a tension between conservative and flexible sustainability definitions. Conservative approaches that only consider explicit ABC+ practice programs exclude costing contracts that may use those practices. Conversely, flexible approaches like SPAS make strong assumptions about sustainability for products such as soybeans, which may ignore negative externalities like glyphosate use and water quality impacts, potentially violating the DNSH principle of the Brazilian Sustainable Taxonomy Action Plan.

Cite the original document

APA
Climate Policy Initiative (2024). Rural Credit Case Study. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/rural-credit-case-study/
Chicago
Climate Policy Initiative. Rural Credit Case Study. 2024. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/rural-credit-case-study/.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Climate Policy Initiative |title=Rural Credit Case Study |date=11 April 2024 |url=https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/rural-credit-case-study/ |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{climatepolicyinitiative2024rural, author = {{Climate Policy Initiative}}, title = {{Rural Credit Case Study}}, institution = {Climate Policy Initiative}, year = {2024}, month = apr, url = {https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/rural-credit-case-study/}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated