Collective statement by soy traders clarifies targets but falls short of 1.5°C ambitions

This week, the eight soy trader signatories to the Agriculture Roadmap to 1.5° released a joint statement entitled Growing Global Agriculture to Its Full Potential, Sustainably and Responsibly as a follow-up to the Agriculture Sector Roadmap to 1.5°C delivered at COP27 last year.  

The joint statement contributes to the progress made over the past year in clarifying the intentions of the signatories to address deforestation and ecosystem conversion linked to their soy supply chains. It complements updated individual commitments by several signatories to eliminate deforestation and conversion associated with soy in key South American origins by 2025.  

The AFi welcomes this progress and emphasises the importance of timely and effective implementation of these strengthened commitments through the signatories’ procurement decisions, supplier engagement, and investments at sourcing origins. It also encourages signatories to strengthen and implement commitments to respecting human rights associated with commodity production. 

Unfortunately, despite these signs of individual progress, the collective target laid out in the joint statement does not provide the level of ambition needed to reduce deforestation and conversion in line with a 1.5°C pathway. Of particular concern are the 2030 target date and cutoff date for eliminating conversion from supply chains. 

Emissions reduction for a 1.5°C pathway 

According to IPCC-informed climate models, a 1.5°C future necessitates that all deforestation and conversion associated with agriculture be eliminated globally by 2030, with a steady decline until that time. Therefore, land use change associated with key drivers in major conversion frontiers, such as soy in South America, needs to be eliminated well before that, with 2025 as an appropriate target. The collective goal in the joint statement does not align with a 1.5°C emissions reduction pathway. 

Geographic scope 

The signatories have clarified the geographic scope of their collective commitments to cover the Amazon, Cerrado, and Chaco biomes. These high-risk biomes are an appropriate starting point for addressing deforestation and conversion associated with soy production. To address climate and nature impacts across their entire business, companies will next need to expand their targets to include other South American biomes including the Pampas, Atlantic Forest, and Chiquitano, as well as current and emerging soy frontiers elsewhere. 

Timeframe 

The signatories have clarified cutoff dates and target dates for their collective commitments, stipulating 2025 as both a cutoff and a target for no-deforestation, and 2030 as both a cutoff and a target for no-conversion. 

The identification of 2030 as a collective cutoff and target date for conversion of non-forest ecosystems is highly problematic. First and foremost, the 2030 dates allow for potentially very high levels of conversion of grasslands, savannahs, and wetlands throughout this decade. In addition to impacts on nature in these biodiverse and unique ecosystems, continued conversion through 2030 in these origins is inconsistent with the Roadmap’s central aim of achieving a 1.5°C aligned pathway. It also undermines market signals to producers that material produced on recently cleared land will not be accepted into commodity supply chains.  

Notably, as of this month, six of the eight signatories have an individual company commitment to eliminate both deforestation and conversion from major portions of their South American soy sourcing by 2025. We expect that signatories with more ambitious targets will continue to pursue those, and that they will not use the Roadmap process to revert to a ‘lowest common denominator’ that may slow individual progress. We also strongly encourage these companies to extend their 2025 no-deforestation and no-conversion commitments, as needed, so that they cover all South American soy origins and suppliers. Signatories with weaker commitments should set more ambitious company-level targets in line with their peers. 

Definition of conversion 

The joint statement defines conversion as clearance of non-forest primary native vegetation, with primary native vegetation defined as assemblages that have “suffered little or no human intervention.” Clear definitions are essential, yet this language presents ambiguity as to which land may be converted in compliance with the joint statement and with individual commitments that use the same definition.  

The Accountability Framework states that agricultural fallows and severely degraded lands are not considered natural ecosystems and may be converted under a no-conversion approach. On the other hand, managed natural ecosystems, such as those used for grazing on native grasslands or savannahs, are considered natural ecosystems and therefore may not be converted under a no-conversion approach. There is concern that the traders’ definition could be interpreted to permit conversion of managed natural ecosystems, contrary to common understandings of a no-conversion approach. The definition put forward by the traders is also not supported by land classification and monitoring tools, such as the Brazilian government’s PRODES platforms, which consider ecosystems to be natural unless they are cleared or severely degraded. 

Further materials put out individually or collectively by the signatories should clarify the intention of the definition in the joint statement so that it aligns with common understandings of the term 'conversion' as specified in the Accountability Framework.

Farmer engagement and incentives 

The bulk of the newly released document provides further detail about how the signatories plan to engage farmers in soy production areas to avoid conversion and sustainability increase production. The AFi recognises these types of initiatives as an important complement to companies’ management of their own supply chains to help transform the soy sector to protect ecosystems and meet climate goals. 

AFi Coalition member perspectives

See statements and responsed to the Agricultural Sector Roadmap Progress Report from AFi Coalition members below:

• WWF: WWF statement on the Agricultural Sector Roadmap Progress Report