Controlling the Ranching Boom that Threatens the Amazon
In the Brazilian Amazon, 80 million head of cattle — nearly as many as
exist in all of the United States — now graze on land that once was
tropical rainforest or the biologically rich, wooded grassland known as
cerrado. An area larger than France is given over to the
cattle, making ranching by far the biggest driver of deforestation in
Brazil’s Amazon, responsible for more than three-quarters of forest
loss.
Environmental groups have warned for years that cattle production is
gobbling up huge chunks of the world’s largest rainforest, but their
campaigns have had no discernable impact on deforestation. Forest
clearing remains stubbornly high while beef production has continued to
expand, enabling the industry to become an economic and political
juggernaut, seemingly unstoppable.
But in catering to conglomerates serving an international market — part
of a broader trend over the past 20 years in which industrial
corporations have replaced poor farmers as the primary agents of
deforestation — producers have left themselves exposed to consumer
backlash. It’s tough for an environmental group to target a subsistence
farmer who’s clearing land to feed his family; it’s much easier to go
after a multinational enterprise. So ironically, in its strength, the
multibillion-dollar Brazilian cattle industry developed an Achilles’
heel.
In June, Greenpeace leveraged this vulnerability. The green group
issued “Slaughtering the Amazon,” a report linking prominent global
corporations — including Wal-Mart, Nike, and the French-based Carrefour
grocery store chain — to cattle operations that are illegally clearing
the Amazon rainforest. The fallout was immediate and substantial, and
now a number of important players are moving to build on the report’s
momentum by enlisting retailing giants to purchase Amazon beef and
leather derived from more sustainable sources.
Those seeking to slow the deforestation of the Brazilian Amazon face
daunting challenges in a region where lawlessness, intimidation, and violence have often ruled. But the publication of the Greenpeace report
has jump-started overnight a market for certified beef and leather,
with the world’s biggest buyers now interested in creating a supply
chain through which meat and hides can be traced to ranches that have
stopped razing the forest and employ sound environmental practices.
Some ranchers, corporations, and conservation groups are considering
using sophisticated techniques — including reliance on satellite
photography and the implantation of tiny electronic identification tags
in cattle — to create a strong system of certification.
Greenpeace’s report, based on a three-year investigation, said that the
Brazilian government had invested $2.65 billion in three major beef and
leather processing companies that have been key players in driving
deforestation. Greenpeace identified a host of brand-name international
firms doing business with the three companies, including the shoe
manufacturers Nike, Adidas, Reebok, and Timberland. The report
highlighted the extent to which Brazilian cattle products end up in a
wide array of consumer goods, from supermarket hamburgers to Nike Airs.
After the Greenpeace report was released, Brazil’s biggest beef
customers — including Wal-Mart and Carrefour — announced they would
suspend contracts with suppliers involved in Amazon deforestation. Nike
and the Timberland shoe company did the same. The World Bank’s
International Finance Corporation withdrew a $90 million loan
commitment from Bertin, the world’s second-largest beef exporter.
Brazilian investigators raided the offices of JBS, the world’s largest
beef processor, and other firms, arresting executives for corruption,
fraud, and collusion.
And a Brazilian federal prosecutor filed a billion-dollar lawsuit against the cattle industry for environmental damage, warning that firms found to be marketing meat raised on illegally cleared Amazon land would be subject
to fines of 500 reais ($260) per kilo. Marfrig, the world’s
fourth-largest beef trader, said it would institute a moratorium on
buying cattle raised in newly deforested areas within the Brazilian
Amazon. BNDES, the development bank that accounts for most financing
for the agricultural sector in Brazil, announced it would reform its
lending policies, making loans contingent on environmental performance.
But while the Greenpeace report effectively turned the Brazilian beef
and leather industry upside down, it was short on solutions. Banning
cattle production in the Amazon is unlikely given the growing global
beef demand, due largely to the surging middle-class appetite for meat
in the emerging economies of Brazil, China, India, and Russia.
In the aftermath of the beef scandal, concerned parties have turned to
an unlikely figure: a Texas rancher named John Cain Carter. Working in
partnership with the Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazônia (a
Brazilian NGO), the Woods Hole Research Institute, and other groups,
Carter’s organization, Alianca da Terra,
has devised a unique approach to promoting land stewardship in the
Amazon, one that could eventually be applied to commodity production in
ecologically sensitive areas around the world.
Carter is not a conventional Brazilian or Texas rancher. After serving
in the first Gulf War, he married a Brazilian and ended up in the
Amazon state of Mato Grosso. At that time, eastern Mato Grosso was a
frontier in the truest sense of the word — a region without governance,
where armed land invasion was rife, conflict between Indian tribes and
outsiders raged, and disputes were settled in blood. The circumstances
perpetuated a forest-clearing bonanza, and Carter moved to the Amazon
during what was perhaps the greatest spasm of forest destruction ever.
Some 79,000 square miles were destroyed between 1995 and 2004 — an area
larger than Nebraska.
Carter readily concedes he is no environmentalist, but he says the carnage around him compelled him to act.
On paper, environmental laws in the Brazilian Amazon are among the
world’s most stringent. Landowners are required to keep 80 percent of
their land forested, but lack of law enforcement has undermined this
regulation, while economics and politics have conspired to thwart
efforts to slow deforestation. For environmental groups, it is hostile
territory.
“Two of my workers were gunned down last week,” Carter said. “This is
not a place for NGOs to be working. It’s a place for the cavalry.”
But even the cavalry isn’t necessarily on the right side of the law,
according to Carter, who says some local officials are complicit in
land-grabbing and illicit forest clearing.
“We have local politicians coming on the radio telling people to invade
the land,” Carter said while piloting his Cessna over a patch of his reserva legal
— the government-mandated forest easement— that was cut and burned by
squatters in October, 2007. Marãiwatsede, the Xavante indigenous
reservation adjoining John Carter’s ranch, has been invaded several
times. At one point the tribe retained control of only a tiny fraction
of its land — an army of invasores was busily cutting down trees.
Still, Carter is hopeful that the situation can be improved by
converting Brazil’s strict environmental codes into a marketing
advantage for ranchers by guaranteeing to buyers that certified beef is
produced sustainably. Aliança da Terra’s certification system aims to take the place of a failed governance
regime by creating incentives for producers to maintain their forest
reserves, reforest waterways, implement fire controls, and conserve
soils. Carter maintains Aliança certification could help Brazilian
farmers and ranchers get premium prices by directly supplying major
supermarkets and restaurant chains that can then say they are using
legally and responsibly produced beef.
“We want market recognition for shouldering this conservation burden,” said Carter.
An unlikely advocate for Cain’s certification initiative is Blairo
Maggi, the soy farmer-turned-governor of Mato Grosso, to whom
Greenpeace gave its “Golden Chainsaw” award in 2005 for being “the
Brazilian person who most contributed to Amazon destruction.” Maggi now
says certification could be a ticket into more markets for Brazilian
agricultural products. Even BNDES, the infamous funder of rainforest
destruction, is now mandating that cattle producers demonstrate that
cattle have been raised on land that was not illegally cleared.
Noting that the creation of protected areas on paper means nothing
without enforcement, Carter said, “If you don’t engage the private
sector, [the forest] is never going to be saved. There need to be
incentives to preserve forest on private property. Ranchers are tired
of being demonized. If they are presented with a viable option, they
can be compelled to become part of the solution.”
In a sign that interest in certification is growing, the Forest Footprint Disclosure Project was launched in June to help identify how an organization’s activities
and supply chains contribute to forest destruction. The U.K.
government-sponsored initiative will ask companies to “disclose how
their operations and supply chains are impacting forests worldwide, and
what is being done to manage those impacts responsibly.” Major buyers
of cattle products are joining in: Both Wal-mart and Nike have
announced that they will require chain-of-custody certification from
suppliers, and major fast-food chains are in negotiations.
Collaborating with Woods Hole, Google Earth, and others, Carter’s group
is working to devise honest land registries and a transparent
certification system. This could involve high-tech methods — including
satellite photo identification of ranches, tiny electrodes implanted in
cattle, and electronic documentation systems — to identify responsible
ranches and the cattle they produce.
Such an effort faces daunting challenges. Many producers are furious
with the Greenpeace report and have threatened to bypass major beef
buyers. While it may seem like an empty threat, Amazon beef is an
export-driven industry and most goes to countries where environmental
performance is at best a distant concern. Likewise, Brazilian shoppers
haven’t shown a strong preference for the eco-credentials of products,
suggesting that there remains a strong market for beef regardless of
how it is produced. Gaming the system is also a possibility, especially
given that BNDES is favoring the use of ear tags — which can be easily
removed — for tracking cattle.
“In my hometown, one of the traditional centers of cattle ranching,
they have a saying: ‘The cow walks, and the earrings fly,’” said Sergio
Abranches, a Brazilian environmental journalist.
However, in the aftermath of the report, the Brazilian government has
expressed keen interest in improving environmental performance. Beyond
that, if such schemes successfully provide a financial carrot in the
form of higher prices for beef and payments for reforestation, ranchers
will be encouraged to become part of the system. But standards can be
taken too far, becoming so burdensome for producers that they drop out
if incentives can’t sufficiently sweeten the deal.
And there are grander issues in play. Brazil has committed to spending
roughly $300 billion on new infrastructure projects, a prospect that
could negate gains from a commodity tracking system and dwarfs the $21
billion the country seeks to raise for protecting the Amazon. Further,
a new law, approved last month by President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva,
could outweigh the value of improved stewardship by ranchers. The law
grants title to hundreds of thousands of farmers, ranchers, and
squatters who have illegally occupied more than a quarter million
square miles of protected forest. At present it is unclear whether the
law will spur increased deforestation or bring some semblance of
governance to the region, making it easier to control deforestation.
To some, these issues may suggest that curbing beef consumption is the
ultimate solution to deforestation in the Amazon. In the meantime,
however, it is clear that industry can play a critical role in turning
the tide in the Amazon. And time, Carter and others point out, is short.
“If we don’t do something soon,” said Carter, “the whole forest is going to go up in smoke.”










