Mettre fin à la déforestation : le piège de la zéro déforestation nette

Report an error

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

The document critiques the concept of 'net zero deforestation,' arguing that it erroneously equates the protection of indigenous forests with the planting of new forests, which cannot replace the 'unrecoverable carbon' and ecosystem services of natural forests. It further asserts that agricultural certifications for soy, such as RTRS and Proterra, are insufficient because they represent only 1.5% to 3% of global production and often allow large-scale monocultures and pesticides. The author calls on banks, insurers, and investors to pressure soy traders like Cargill to stop purchasing soy from land converted after January 1, 2020.

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
  • There is a critical distinction between 'zero deforestation,' which prohibits the conversion of forest areas, and 'net zero deforestation,' which allows forest loss if an equivalent area is replanted elsewhere. The latter is criticized for lacking a common definition of forests and for the potential for fraudulent claims where companies protect forests that were not actually under threat.
  • Net zero deforestation goals are fundamentally flawed because they treat the protection of indigenous forests as equivalent to planting new forests. Natural ecosystems store 'unrecoverable carbon' and provide essential ecosystem services, such as weather and water regulation, that plantations cannot replace.
  • Agricultural certifications for soy, specifically RTRS and Proterra, are largely ineffective as they account for only 1.5% to 3% of total global soy production. These systems often permit large-scale monocultures, heavy pesticide use, and high water consumption; furthermore, only the 'segregation' modality of RTRS guarantees the absence of deforested soy, while 'mass balance' and 'country material balance' allow the mixing of certified and non-certified soy.
  • Financial institutions, including banks, insurers, and investors, are urged to require soy traders such as Cargill to update producer contracts to include a commitment to stop buying soy from land converted after January 1, 2020.

Cite the original document

APA
admin (2021). Mettre fin à la déforestation : le piège de la zéro déforestation nette. Reclaim Finance. https://reclaimfinance.org/site/2021/01/22/mettre-fin-a-la-deforestation-le-piege-de-la-zero-deforestation-nette/
Chicago
admin. Mettre fin à la déforestation : le piège de la zéro déforestation nette. Reclaim Finance, 2021. https://reclaimfinance.org/site/2021/01/22/mettre-fin-a-la-deforestation-le-piege-de-la-zero-deforestation-nette/.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |last1=admin |title=Mettre fin à la déforestation : le piège de la zéro déforestation nette |publisher=Reclaim Finance |date=22 January 2021 |url=https://reclaimfinance.org/site/2021/01/22/mettre-fin-a-la-deforestation-le-piege-de-la-zero-deforestation-nette/ |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{admin2021mettre, author = {admin}, title = {{Mettre fin à la déforestation : le piège de la zéro déforestation nette}}, publisher = {Reclaim Finance}, year = {2021}, month = jan, url = {https://reclaimfinance.org/site/2021/01/22/mettre-fin-a-la-deforestation-le-piege-de-la-zero-deforestation-nette/}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated