1 biodiversity and socio-economic impacts of trade-oriented agro-commodity production systems unep...
TRANSCRIPT
1
www.aidenvironment.org
Biodiversity and socio-economic impacts of trade-oriented agro-commodity production systems
UNEP 28 November 2007
Jan Joost Kessler
AIDEnvironment
2
Objectives of the study
• To assess the biodiversity and socio-economic impacts of the Dutch / EU trade and consumption of certain agro-commodities
• To develop a suitable methodology to do so
• Focus at agro-commodities for which NL is important consumer and the most important producer countries:– soy (in Argentina and Brazil)– palm oil (in Indonesia and Malaysia)– beef (in Argentina and Brazil) – coffee (in Honduras and Vietnam)
3
Assessment of biodiversity impacts
1. Selection of administrative units in countries where production is concentrated
2. Insight in production systems
3. Data on land-use dynamics / expansion for agro-commodities in recent 5-8 years (= study period)
4. Calculation of 5 indicators based on concept of Natural Capital Index
4
Natural Capital Index = quantity x quality
quality
quantity
100%
100%0%
100%100%
100%0%
70%
100%
100%0%
25%
50%
50%
past today tomorrow
Habitat loss
Habitatloss
NCI
5
The decline of NCI as land-use intensifies
pristine forest
selective logging
secondary vegetation
plantation
degraded
Literature review- Tropical & temperate regions- Plants, insects, birds, other vertebrates
100%
0%
50%
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
prim
ary
fore
st
sele
ctive
loggin
g
secondary
fore
st
agro
fore
str
y
pla
nta
tions
cro
pla
nd
pastu
re
mean s
pecie
s a
bundance
Biodiversity ( NCI)
6
Reference data on NCI decline for land-use
Main GLC 2000 class Sub category Description NCI loss by class (%)
Forests (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)
Primary vegetation (forest)
Minimal disturbance, where flora and fauna species abundance are near pristine
0
Slightly disturbed or managed forest
Extractive use like hunting, selective logging, timber extraction and re-growth
30
Secondary forests Natural regrowth 50
Forest plantation Planted forest often with exotic species 80
Shrubs and grasslands (11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
Primary vegetation (grass / shrublands)
Grassland or shrubs dominated vegetation (e.g. steppe, tundra or savannah)
0
Livestock grazing Grasslands with wildlife replaced by grazing livestock
30
Man-made pastures Forests and woodlands converted to grasslands for livestock grazing.
90
Mosaic: cropland / forest (17)
Agroforestry Agricultural production intercropped with (native) trees.
50
Cultivated and managed areas (16, 18)
Low input agriculture Extensive resource-use and low external input agriculture
70
Intensive agriculture High external input agriculture, dependent on external inputs and/or irrigation.
90
7
Biodiversity indicators used in study
Indicators Description of relevance
B0. Area increase agro-commodity Area change used for agro-commodity production in study period
B1. Growth factor commodity crop area
The ratio between B0 and original production area.
B2. NCI in the production area compared to the national average
The NCI in 2000 (taking into account different types of land use) in the production areas as compared to the national average.
B3. Loss of biodiversity due to the commodity
NCI loss in the study period as a result of the commodity expansion.
B4. Relative contribution of the commodity to overall biodiversity loss
NCI loss by the commodity during the study period as a proportion of overall NCI decline by land-use
B5 Ecological claim (overall biodiversity loss)
Overall biodiversity loss from natural ecosystems with corrections for the original land use and multiplier effects.
8
Example of results for soy in Brazil
Country and production areas
B0: Area increase by commodity (x 1000 ha)
B1: Growth factor
commodity(%)
B2: NCI in production
area in 2000* (in % NCI)
B3: NCI loss by commodity
(% NCI)
B4: Part of commodity to
NCI loss(in %)
B5: Ecological claim
(in km²)
Soy Brazil
Rio Grande do Sul 962 0.24 − − 1 1 1,656
Paraná 1,801 0.45 − − 1 2 2,065
Mato Grosso 2,940 0.56 + 3 17 31,552
Goiás 1,470 0.55 − − 4 10 13,311
Tocantins 233 0.92 + 1 5 2,407
Maranhão 253 0.74 = 1 3 2,480
Piauí 143 0.93 = 1 2 1,400
Total Brazil 9,860 0.46 76% 1 3 65,498
9
Biodiversity loss from soy in Brazil and Argentina before 1995 (yellow) and between 1995-2004 (red)
10
Some conclusions• B0: Expansion of selected commodities in selected production areas
during study period was 28 m ha, and about 67 m ha in the countries. • B1: Soy showed the highest growth factors (80-90%). Low growth factors
occur in established region. Growth factors are highest in frontier regions.• B2: In expansion and frontier areas NCI is often higher than the national
average. • B3: NCI loss by commodity is generally not high (1-5%), because areas
are large. • B4: The contribution from commodity production during the study period to
overall biodiversity loss by land-use may be more than 10%. • B5: reflects the ecological impacts in terms of area with 100% NCI loss,
which may be quite high. Corrected for multiplier effects. • Total biodiversity loss caused by the commodities in selected areas in the
study period corresponds to 154,000 km² (= four times the Netherlands). • Multiplier effects are macro-level changes due to the agro-commodity, e.g.
displacement of people or expansion as a result of food competition.
11
Assessment of socio-economic impacts
Indicators
E. Economic
E1. Per capita gross domestic product (national and administrative units)
E2. Employment rate
S. Social
S1. Food security, child mortality
S5. Poverty (index)
V. Vulnerability
V1. Conflicts
V2. Inequality
12
Assessment of socio-economic impacts
Economic / Profit Social / People Vulnerability / people Planet
Commodity, country and production regions
GDP / capita
Employmt. rural/urban
Food security
Poverty / HPI Conflicts
Inequality / Gini
NCI change
Soy Brazil
Established
Expansion
Frontier
Legend:
better or similar starting situation, with favourable or similar rate of change
better or similar starting situation, with unfavourable rate of change
worse starting situation, with favourable or similar rate of change
worse starting situation, with unfavourable rate of change
13
Main conclusions• Considerable loss of NCI by agro-commodities, mainly in
expansion and frontier areas, can be roughly quantified by using NCI and reference data
• Loss of NCI by production and trade of agro-commodities is not, or not sufficiently compensated by improvement of socio-economic well-being, especially in frontier areas
• The methodology allows one to assess these changes at sub-national level, especially for selected areas where statistics are available – assessments at national level would not be useful
• Major risks now with expansion of biofuels (e.g. palmoil)• Doubts about theory of export-oriented growth?
14
Thank you