The agreement protecting the Amazon is crumbling in Brazil – The forest cover regulation must not be watered down

From the reader. In Brazil, one of the most important mechanisms to protect the Amazon rainforest, the so-called soy moratorium, is about to fall. It is an agreement by which large companies have refrained from buying soybeans from soybean fields cleared for the Amazon after 2008, from which soybeans mostly end up as animal feed.

Now Abiove, which represents large soy companies, has said that it will withdraw from the agreement. The new free trade agreement between the EU and four South American countries, Mercosur, will probably increase the pressure to clear the Amazon rainforest.

At the same time, in Europe, they want to weaken the EU’s deforestation regulation, which promotes stopping deforestation, even before it has become mandatory. Weakening the setting would be a mistake. Deforestation accelerates both the loss of nature and the climate crisis, weakens local water resources and food security, exposes livelihoods to extreme weather phenomena and increases the risk of forest fires. All of these increase risks for the economy and companies, as the recently published risk assessment of the World Economic Forum states.

ME: lla iso rooli

The EU has a special responsibility in combating deforestation, as up to 10 percent of the world’s deforestation is directly caused by EU consumption. Without a deforestation regulation, actions to combat deforestation are largely voluntary. Pioneer companies that have already developed their operations pay the costs while the lazy ones benefit. The deforestation regulation would make the rules of the game fair, when the competition would be based on quality and efficiency, not at the expense of forests.

The deforestation regulation is already a clear market signal, as many companies have improved the traceability of their raw materials in preparation for the regulation. For example, in the cocoa sector, companies have significantly accelerated the management of origin information and deforestation risks. According to WWF’s recent report, the regulation has initiated significant changes in supply chains and accelerated the transition towards deforestation-free value chains. In Finland, the Food Agency has been informing, training and supporting various operators for a long time.

So considerable time, money and know-how have been spent on the preparation. The tools are there, and the market is moving – especially when regulation gives a clear direction. Finland should defend the credible implementation and ambitious goals of the deforestation regulation in the EU, not propose further weakening of the regulation. Now regulation needs consistency. Raw materials and products produced at the expense of irreplaceable forests, such as the Amazon, do not belong on the EU market.