posts: 40057
Data license: CC-BY
This data as json
| id | title | slug | type | status | content | archieml | archieml_update_statistics | published_at | updated_at | gdocSuccessorId | authors | excerpt | created_at_in_wordpress | updated_at_in_wordpress | featured_image | formattingOptions | markdown | wpApiSnapshot |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40057 | Do rich countries import deforestation from overseas? | exporting-deforestation | post | publish | <!-- wp:html --> <div class="blog-info"> <p>Our World in Data presents the data and research to make progress against the world’s largest problems.<br>This blog post draws on data and research discussed in our entry on <strong><a href="https://ourworldindata.org/forests-and-deforestation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Forests and Deforestation</a></strong>.</p> </div> <!-- /wp:html --> <!-- wp:owid/summary --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Forests in many rich countries have been expanding in recent decades. But, consumers in high-income countries can also contribute to the loss of forests overseas by buying agricultural products that were produced on deforested land. 12% of deforestation was driven by demand from rich countries. To account for the impact that a particular country has on the global forests it makes sense to compare the domestic forest change with the outsourced impact on forests. </p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Some countries, such as the US, Finland and China, are regrowing their forests at a much faster rate than imported deforestation – consumption in these countries allows the forests on net to expand. But others, such as the UK, Germany and Spain, create more deforestation in other countries than they restore at home – consumers in these countries are driving a net loss in global forests.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- /wp:owid/summary --> <!-- wp-block-tombstone 40063 --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>There is a marked divide in the state of the world’s forests. In most rich countries, across Europe, North America and East Asia, <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/change-forest-vs-gdp?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=&region=World">forest cover is increasing</a>, whilst in many low-to-middle income countries it’s decreasing.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>But, it would be wrong to think that the only impact rich countries have on global forests is through changes in their domestic forests. They also contribute to global deforestation through the foods they import from poorer countries.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Today, most deforestation occurs in the tropics. 71% of this is driven by demand in domestic markets, and the remaining 29% for the production of products that are traded. 40% of traded deforestation ends up in high-income countries, meaning they are responsible for 12% of deforestation.{ref}If we sum countries’ <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation">imported deforestation</a> by <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-banks-income-groups?time=2013&country=IND~IDN">World Bank income group</a>, we find that high-income countries were responsible for 40% of imported deforestation; upper-middle income for 25%; lower-middle income for 20%; and low income for 5%.<br><br>We then get high-income countries' share of deforestation as: [40% of the 29% that is traded], which is equal to 12%.{/ref}</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Let’s take a look at which countries are causing deforestation overseas and the size of this impact.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:heading {"level":4} --> <h4>Which countries are causing deforestation overseas?</h4> <!-- /wp:heading --> <!-- wp:columns --> <div class="wp-block-columns"><!-- wp:column --> <div class="wp-block-column"><!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>How much do people in rich countries contribute to deforestation overseas?</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>To investigate this question, researchers Florence Pendrill et al. (2019) quantified the deforestation embedded in traded goods between countries.{ref}Pendrill, F., Persson, U. M., Godar, J., & Kastner, T. (2019). <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0d41">Deforestation displaced: trade in forest-risk commodities and the prospects for a global forest transition</a>. <em>Environmental Research Letters</em>, <em>14</em>(5), 055003.{/ref} They did this by calculating the amount of deforestation associated with specific food and forestry products, and combining it with a trade model.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>In the map we see the <em>net</em> deforestation embedded in trade for each country. This is calculated by taking each country’s <em>imported</em> deforestation and subtracting its <em>exported</em> deforestation. Net importers of deforestation (shown in brown) are countries that contribute more to deforestation in other countries than they do in their home country. The consumption choices of people in these countries cause deforestation elsewhere in the world.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>For example, after we adjust for all the goods that the UK imports and exports, it caused more deforestation elsewhere than it did domestically. It was a net importer. Brazil, in contrast, caused more deforestation domestically in the production of goods for other countries than it imported from elsewhere. It was a net exporter.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Although there is some year-to-year variability <em>[you can explore the data use the timeline on the bottom of the chart from 2005 to 2013]</em> we see a reasonably consistent divide: most countries across Europe and North America are net importers of deforestation i.e. they’re driving deforestation elsewhere; whilst many subtropical countries are partly cutting down trees to meet this demand from rich countries. </p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Most deforestation occurs for the production of goods that are consumed within domestic markets. 71% of deforestation is for domestic production. Less than one-third (29%) is for the production of goods that are traded.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>High-income countries were the largest 'importers' of deforestation, accounting for 40% of it. This means they were responsible for 12% of global deforestation.{ref}If we sum countries’ <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation">imported deforestation</a> by <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-banks-income-groups?time=2013&country=IND~IDN">World Bank income group</a>, we find that high-income countries were responsible for 40% of imported deforestation; upper-middle income for 25%; lower-middle income for 20%; and low income for 5%.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>We then get high-income countries' share of deforestation as: [40% of the 29% that is traded], which is equal to 12%.{/ref} It is therefore true that rich countries are causing deforestation in poorer countries.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --></div> <!-- /wp:column --> <!-- wp:column --> <div class="wp-block-column"><!-- wp:html --> <iframe src="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/net-deforestation-in-trade?stackMode=absolute&region=World" loading="lazy" style="width: 100%; height: 600px; border: 0px none;"></iframe> <!-- /wp:html --> <!-- wp:heading {"level":5} --> <h5>Related charts:</h5> <!-- /wp:heading --> <!-- wp:owid/prominent-link {"title":"Imported deforestation","linkUrl":"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation","className":"is-style-thin"} /--> <!-- wp:owid/prominent-link {"title":"Exported deforestation","linkUrl":"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/exported-deforestation","className":"is-style-thin"} /--> <!-- wp:owid/prominent-link {"title":"Share of deforestation that is exported","linkUrl":"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-deforestation-exported","className":"is-style-thin"} /--> <!-- wp:owid/prominent-link {"title":"Share of deforestation that is driven by domestic consumption","linkUrl":"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-deforestation-domestic-consumption","className":"is-style-thin"} /--></div> <!-- /wp:column --></div> <!-- /wp:columns --> <!-- wp:heading {"level":4} --> <h4>Are countries importing more deforestation than they’re regrowing domestically?</h4> <!-- /wp:heading --> <!-- wp:columns --> <div class="wp-block-columns"><!-- wp:column --> <div class="wp-block-column"><!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Many rich countries are driving deforestation in other parts of the world, but are regrowing forests domestically. 79% of exported deforestation ended up in those countries that had stopped losing domestic forests.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>How do these two measures compare? Are they causing more deforestation elsewhere than they are regenerating in forests at home? </p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Let’s take an example. Imagine some temperate country was responsible for the deforestation of 25,000 hectares in tropical countries but was restoring its own forests at a rate of 50,000 hectares per year. On balance, it would still have a positive impact on the size of global forests; its net contribution would be increasing forest area by 25,000 hectares.{ref}We would subtract its deforestation (25,000 hectares) from its reforestation (50,000 hectares) to get 25,000 hectares net gain.{/ref} However, this country might still be causing more damage than this for a couple of reasons. Not all forest is equal. Tropical forests are often more productive than temperate forests, meaning they store more carbon. They are also richer sites of biodiversity. And, we might place more value on preserving primary, native forests that haven’t yet been deforested over regrowing forests that have lost their previous ecosystems. Hence, we should keep in mind that forest area is not the only aspect that matters – where that forest is and how rich in life it is matters too.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>It would be good if there was data available that would capture these additional aspects. We manage to capture some of these differences in carbon in our related article on <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-trade"><strong>deforestation </strong><strong><em>emissions</em></strong><strong> embedded in trade</strong></a>. Without reliable metrics that capture all of these differences, we will have to stick with total changes in forest area for now. But we should keep these important aspects in mind when comparing forest losses and gains.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>In the chart we see the comparison between the change in domestic forest area, and deforestation driven by imported goods.{ref}Data on the annual change in domestic forests is sourced from the UN FAO’s <a href="https://fra-data.fao.org/">Forest Resources Assessment</a>.{/ref} On the vertical axis we have the domestic change in forest area: this is shown only for countries where the forest area is increasing. Since there is often year-to-year variability in deforestation or reforestation rates, this is shown as the five-year average. On the x-axis we have imported deforestation. The grey line marks where the area of domestic regrowth of forests is exactly equal to imported deforestation. Countries that lie along this line would have a net-neutral impact on global forests: the area they are causing to deforestation overseas is exactly as large as the area they are regrowing at home.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Countries which lie <em>above</em> the grey line – such as the United States, Finland, China – restore more forest each year domestically than they import from elsewhere. For example, the US ‘imported’ 64,000 hectares of deforested land, but increased its domestic forest area by 275,000 hectares. More than four times as much. On balance, they add to the global forest stock. </p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Countries below the line – such as the UK and Germany – are not growing forests fast enough to offset the deforestation they’re creating elsewhere. The UK ‘imported’ 34,000 hectares of deforestation but increased its domestic forests by only 19,000 hectares. These countries might have high levels of afforestation at home, but they’re still having a net negative impact on the size of the world’s forests.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --></div> <!-- /wp:column --> <!-- wp:column --> <div class="wp-block-column"><!-- wp:html --> <iframe src="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/domestic-forest-change-vs-imported-deforestation?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=&region=World" loading="lazy" style="width: 100%; height: 600px; border: 0px none;"></iframe> <!-- /wp:html --></div> <!-- /wp:column --></div> <!-- /wp:columns --> <!-- wp:heading {"level":4} --> <h4>Rich countries need to be more conscious of how they’re contributing to global deforestation</h4> <!-- /wp:heading --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>After seeing this data, people might argue that we should cut back on trade. If poorer countries are cutting down forests to make food for rich consumers, then we should just stop trading these goods.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>But the solution is not so simple. There are other aspects to consider. International trade is important for socioeconomic development. Many farmers rely on international buyers to earn a living and improve their livelihoods. Not only would this be bad for people, it might also be bad for forests. </p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>One of the reasons poorer countries clear forest to make room for farmland is that they achieve low <a href="http://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields">crop yields</a>. If you struggle to increase crop yields but want to produce more food, then expanding your agricultural land is the only option. This often comes at the cost of forests. Improvements in agricultural productivity tends to both drive and follow <a href="http://ourworldindata.org/economic-growth">economic growth</a>. International trade plays an important role in this growth, and may allow farmers to see the yield gains they need to produce more food using less land.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>So, what can we do? </p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>One option is to adopt stricter guidelines on what suppliers to source from, and implementing zero-deforestation policies that stop the trade of goods that have been produced on deforested land. Another way that richer countries can contribute is by investing in technologies – such as improved seed varieties, fertilizers and agricultural practices – that allow farmers to increase yields. That’s both an economic and environmental win.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>The first step in doing this is for rich countries to monitor their deforestation impacts overseas more closely. They should keep their domestic reforestation targets in perspective with their net impact on global forests. Sometimes these restoration programmes pale in comparison to the deforestation they’re driving elsewhere.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:separator --> <hr class="wp-block-separator"/> <!-- /wp:separator --> <!-- wp:heading {"level":4} --> <h4><em>More of our articles on Forests and Deforestation...</em></h4> <!-- /wp:heading --> <!-- wp:owid/prominent-link {"title":"Cutting down forests: what are the drivers of deforestation?","linkUrl":"https://ourworldindata.org/drivers-of-deforestation#cutting-down-forests-what-are-the-drivers-of-deforestation","mediaId":40140,"mediaUrl":"https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/deforestation-drivers-thumbnail-01.png","mediaAlt":"","className":"is-style-thin"} /--> <!-- wp:owid/prominent-link {"title":"Forest Transitions: why do we lose then regain forests?","linkUrl":"https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#forest-transitions-why-do-we-lose-then-regain-forests","mediaId":40733,"mediaUrl":"https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/forest-area-as-share-of-land-area-2.svg","mediaAlt":"","className":"is-style-thin"} /--> <!-- wp:owid/prominent-link {"title":"Carbon emissions from deforestation: are they driven by domestic demand or international trade?","linkUrl":"https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-tradehttps://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-trade","mediaId":40071,"mediaUrl":"https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/Deforestation-emissions-in-trade-–-Sankey-01.png","mediaAlt":"","className":"is-style-thin"} /--> | {
"id": "wp-40057",
"slug": "exporting-deforestation",
"content": {
"toc": [],
"body": [
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Our World in Data presents the data and research to make progress against the world\u2019s largest problems.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"spanType": "span-newline"
},
{
"text": "This blog post draws on data and research discussed in our entry on ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"children": [
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/forests-and-deforestation",
"children": [
{
"text": "Forests and Deforestation",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
}
],
"spanType": "span-bold"
},
{
"text": ".",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"text": [
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Forests in many rich countries have been expanding in recent decades. But, consumers in high-income countries can also contribute to the loss of forests overseas by buying agricultural products that were produced on deforested land. 12% of deforestation was driven by demand from rich countries. To account for the impact that a particular country has on the global forests it makes sense to compare the domestic forest change with the outsourced impact on forests. ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Some countries, such as the US, Finland and China, are regrowing their forests at a much faster rate than imported deforestation \u2013 consumption in these countries allows the forests on net to expand. But others, such as the UK, Germany and Spain, create more deforestation in other countries than they restore at home \u2013 consumers in these countries are driving a net loss in global forests.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
}
],
"type": "callout",
"title": "Summary",
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "There is a marked divide in the state of the world\u2019s forests. In most rich countries, across Europe, North America and East Asia, ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/change-forest-vs-gdp?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=®ion=World",
"children": [
{
"text": "forest cover is increasing",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": ", whilst in many low-to-middle income countries it\u2019s decreasing.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "But, it would be wrong to think that the only impact rich countries have on global forests is through changes in their domestic forests. They also contribute to global deforestation through the foods they import from poorer countries.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Today, most deforestation occurs in the tropics. 71% of this is driven by demand in domestic markets, and the remaining 29% for the production of products that are traded. 40% of traded deforestation ends up in high-income countries, meaning they are responsible for 12% of deforestation.{ref}If we sum countries\u2019 ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation",
"children": [
{
"text": "imported deforestation",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": " by ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-banks-income-groups?time=2013&country=IND~IDN",
"children": [
{
"text": "World Bank income group",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": ", we find that high-income countries were responsible for 40% of imported deforestation; upper-middle income for 25%; lower-middle income for 20%; and low income for 5%.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"spanType": "span-newline"
},
{
"spanType": "span-newline"
},
{
"text": "We then get high-income countries' share of deforestation as: [40% of the 29% that is traded], which is equal to 12%.{/ref}",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Let\u2019s take a look at which countries are causing deforestation overseas and the size of this impact.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"text": [
{
"text": "Which countries are causing deforestation overseas?",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"type": "heading",
"level": 2,
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"left": [
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "How much do people in rich countries contribute to deforestation overseas?",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "To investigate this question, researchers Florence Pendrill et al. (2019) quantified the deforestation embedded in traded goods between countries.{ref}Pendrill, F., Persson, U. M., Godar, J., & Kastner, T. (2019). ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0d41",
"children": [
{
"text": "Deforestation displaced: trade in forest-risk commodities and the prospects for a global forest transition",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": ". ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"children": [
{
"text": "Environmental Research Letters",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
},
{
"text": ", ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"children": [
{
"text": "14",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
},
{
"text": "(5), 055003.{/ref} They did this by calculating the amount of deforestation associated with specific food and forestry products, and combining it with a trade model.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "In the map we see the ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"children": [
{
"text": "net",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
},
{
"text": " deforestation embedded in trade for each country. This is calculated by taking each country\u2019s ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"children": [
{
"text": "imported",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
},
{
"text": " deforestation and subtracting its ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"children": [
{
"text": "exported",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
},
{
"text": " deforestation. Net importers of deforestation (shown in brown) are countries that contribute more to deforestation in other countries than they do in their home country. The consumption choices of people in these countries cause deforestation elsewhere in the world.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "For example, after we adjust for all the goods that the UK imports and exports, it caused more deforestation elsewhere than it did domestically. It was a net importer. Brazil, in contrast, caused more deforestation domestically in the production of goods for other countries than it imported from elsewhere. It was a net exporter.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Although there is some year-to-year variability ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"children": [
{
"text": "[you can explore the data use the timeline on the bottom of the chart from 2005 to 2013]",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
},
{
"text": " we see a reasonably consistent divide: most countries across Europe and North America are net importers of deforestation i.e. they\u2019re driving deforestation elsewhere; whilst many subtropical countries are partly cutting down trees to meet this demand from rich countries.\u00a0",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Most deforestation occurs for the production of goods that are consumed within domestic markets. 71% of deforestation is for domestic production. Less than one-third (29%) is for the production of goods that are traded.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "High-income countries were the largest 'importers' of deforestation, accounting for 40% of it. This means they were responsible for 12% of global deforestation.{ref}If we sum countries\u2019 ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation",
"children": [
{
"text": "imported deforestation",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": " by ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-banks-income-groups?time=2013&country=IND~IDN",
"children": [
{
"text": "World Bank income group",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": ", we find that high-income countries were responsible for 40% of imported deforestation; upper-middle income for 25%; lower-middle income for 20%; and low income for 5%.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "We then get high-income countries' share of deforestation as: [40% of the 29% that is traded], which is equal to 12%.{/ref} It is therefore true that rich countries are causing deforestation in poorer countries.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
}
],
"type": "sticky-right",
"right": [
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/net-deforestation-in-trade?stackMode=absolute®ion=World",
"type": "chart",
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"text": [
{
"text": "Related charts:",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"type": "heading",
"level": 5,
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation",
"type": "prominent-link",
"title": "Imported deforestation",
"description": "",
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/exported-deforestation",
"type": "prominent-link",
"title": "Exported deforestation",
"description": "",
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-deforestation-exported",
"type": "prominent-link",
"title": "Share of deforestation that is exported",
"description": "",
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-deforestation-domestic-consumption",
"type": "prominent-link",
"title": "Share of deforestation that is driven by domestic consumption",
"description": "",
"parseErrors": []
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"text": [
{
"text": "Are countries importing more deforestation than they\u2019re regrowing domestically?",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"type": "heading",
"level": 2,
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"left": [
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Many rich countries are driving deforestation in other parts of the world, but are regrowing forests domestically. 79% of exported deforestation ended up in those countries that had stopped losing domestic forests.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "How do these two measures compare? Are they causing more deforestation elsewhere than they are regenerating in forests at home?\u00a0",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Let\u2019s take an example. Imagine some temperate country was responsible for the deforestation of 25,000 hectares in tropical countries but was restoring its own forests at a rate of 50,000 hectares per year. On balance, it would still have a positive impact on the size of global forests; its net contribution would be increasing forest area by 25,000 hectares.{ref}We would subtract its deforestation (25,000 hectares) from its reforestation (50,000 hectares) to get 25,000 hectares net gain.{/ref} However, this country might still be causing more damage than this for a couple of reasons. Not all forest is equal. Tropical forests are often more productive than temperate forests, meaning they store more carbon. They are also richer sites of biodiversity. And, we might place more value on preserving primary, native forests that haven\u2019t yet been deforested over regrowing forests that have lost their previous ecosystems. Hence, we should keep in mind that forest area is not the only aspect that matters \u2013\u00a0where that forest is and how rich in life it is matters too.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "It would be good if there was data available that would capture these additional aspects. We manage to capture some of these differences in carbon in our related article on ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-trade",
"children": [
{
"children": [
{
"text": "deforestation ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-bold"
},
{
"children": [
{
"children": [
{
"text": "emissions",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
}
],
"spanType": "span-bold"
},
{
"children": [
{
"text": " embedded in trade",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-bold"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": ". Without reliable metrics that capture all of these differences, we will have to stick with total changes in forest area for now. But we should keep these important aspects in mind when comparing forest losses and gains.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "In the chart we see the comparison between the change in domestic forest area, and deforestation driven by imported goods.{ref}Data on the annual change in domestic forests is sourced from the UN FAO\u2019s ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "https://fra-data.fao.org/",
"children": [
{
"text": "Forest Resources Assessment",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": ".{/ref} On the vertical axis we have the domestic change in forest area: this is shown only for countries where the forest area is increasing. Since there is often year-to-year variability in deforestation or reforestation rates, this is shown as the five-year average. On the x-axis we have imported deforestation. The grey line marks where the area of domestic regrowth of forests is exactly equal to imported deforestation. Countries that lie along this line would have a net-neutral impact on global forests: the area they are causing to deforestation overseas is exactly as large as the area they are regrowing at home.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Countries which lie ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"children": [
{
"text": "above",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
},
{
"text": " the grey line \u2013 such as the United States, Finland, China \u2013 restore more forest each year domestically than they import from elsewhere. For example, the US \u2018imported\u2019 64,000 hectares of deforested land, but increased its domestic forest area by 275,000 hectares. More than four times as much. On balance, they add to the global forest stock.\u00a0",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "Countries below the line \u2013 such as the UK and Germany \u2013 are not growing forests fast enough to offset the deforestation they\u2019re creating elsewhere. The UK \u2018imported\u2019 34,000 hectares of deforestation but increased its domestic forests by only 19,000 hectares. These countries might have high levels of afforestation at home, but they\u2019re still having a net negative impact on the size of the world\u2019s forests.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
}
],
"type": "sticky-right",
"right": [
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/domestic-forest-change-vs-imported-deforestation?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=®ion=World",
"type": "chart",
"parseErrors": []
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"text": [
{
"text": "Rich countries need to be more conscious of how they\u2019re contributing to global deforestation",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"type": "heading",
"level": 2,
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "After seeing this data, people might argue that we should cut back on trade. If poorer countries are cutting down forests to make food for rich consumers, then we should just stop trading these goods.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "But the solution is not so simple. There are other aspects to consider. International trade is important for socioeconomic development. Many farmers rely on international buyers to earn a living and improve their livelihoods. Not only would this be bad for people, it might also be bad for forests.\u00a0",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "One of the reasons poorer countries clear forest to make room for farmland is that they achieve low ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "http://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields",
"children": [
{
"text": "crop yields",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": ". If you struggle to increase crop yields but want to produce more food, then expanding your agricultural land is the only option. This often comes at the cost of forests. Improvements in agricultural productivity tends to both drive and follow ",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
},
{
"url": "http://ourworldindata.org/economic-growth",
"children": [
{
"text": "economic growth",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-link"
},
{
"text": ". International trade plays an important role in this growth, and may allow farmers to see the yield gains they need to produce more food using less land.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "So, what can we do?\u00a0",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "One option is to adopt stricter guidelines on what suppliers to source from, and implementing zero-deforestation policies that stop the trade of goods that have been produced on deforested land. Another way that richer countries can contribute is by investing in technologies \u2013 such as improved seed varieties, fertilizers and agricultural practices \u2013 that allow farmers to increase yields. That\u2019s both an economic and environmental win.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"type": "text",
"value": [
{
"text": "The first step in doing this is for rich countries to monitor their deforestation impacts overseas more closely. They should keep their domestic reforestation targets in perspective with their net impact on global forests. Sometimes these restoration programmes pale in comparison to the deforestation they\u2019re driving elsewhere.",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"text": [
{
"children": [
{
"text": "More of our articles on Forests and Deforestation...",
"spanType": "span-simple-text"
}
],
"spanType": "span-italic"
}
],
"type": "heading",
"level": 2,
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/drivers-of-deforestation#cutting-down-forests-what-are-the-drivers-of-deforestation",
"type": "prominent-link",
"title": "Cutting down forests: what are the drivers of deforestation?",
"description": "",
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#forest-transitions-why-do-we-lose-then-regain-forests",
"type": "prominent-link",
"title": "Forest Transitions: why do we lose then regain forests?",
"description": "",
"parseErrors": []
},
{
"url": "https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-tradehttps://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-trade",
"type": "prominent-link",
"title": "Carbon emissions from deforestation: are they driven by domestic demand or international trade?",
"description": "",
"parseErrors": []
}
],
"type": "article",
"title": "Do rich countries import deforestation from overseas?",
"authors": [
"Hannah Ritchie"
],
"excerpt": "Rich countries import foods produced on deforested land in the tropics. How much deforestation do they import?",
"dateline": "March 1, 2021",
"subtitle": "Rich countries import foods produced on deforested land in the tropics. How much deforestation do they import?",
"sidebar-toc": false,
"featured-image": "net-deforestation-in-trade.png"
},
"createdAt": "2021-02-06T16:57:44.000Z",
"published": false,
"updatedAt": "2022-04-27T16:14:45.000Z",
"revisionId": null,
"publishedAt": "2021-03-01T11:30:00.000Z",
"relatedCharts": [],
"publicationContext": "listed"
} |
{
"errors": [
{
"name": "unhandled html tag found",
"details": "Encountered the unhandled tag hr"
},
{
"name": "unexpected wp component tag",
"details": "Found unhandled wp:comment tag separator"
}
],
"numBlocks": 21,
"numErrors": 2,
"wpTagCounts": {
"html": 3,
"column": 4,
"columns": 2,
"heading": 5,
"paragraph": 27,
"separator": 1,
"owid/summary": 1,
"owid/prominent-link": 7
},
"htmlTagCounts": {
"p": 28,
"h4": 4,
"h5": 1,
"hr": 1,
"div": 7,
"iframe": 2
}
} |
2021-03-01 11:30:00 | 2024-02-16 14:22:51 | 1QBs4T5UeQctLlt26jtzZkLcuMltk-5IZkqlwR8gTcZE | [
"Hannah Ritchie"
] |
Rich countries import foods produced on deforested land in the tropics. How much deforestation do they import? | 2021-02-06 16:57:44 | 2022-04-27 16:14:45 | https://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/net-deforestation-in-trade.png | {} |
Our World in Data presents the data and research to make progress against the world’s largest problems. This blog post draws on data and research discussed in our entry on **[Forests and Deforestation](https://ourworldindata.org/forests-and-deforestation)**. <Callout title="Summary"/> There is a marked divide in the state of the world’s forests. In most rich countries, across Europe, North America and East Asia, [forest cover is increasing](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/change-forest-vs-gdp?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=®ion=World), whilst in many low-to-middle income countries it’s decreasing. But, it would be wrong to think that the only impact rich countries have on global forests is through changes in their domestic forests. They also contribute to global deforestation through the foods they import from poorer countries. Today, most deforestation occurs in the tropics. 71% of this is driven by demand in domestic markets, and the remaining 29% for the production of products that are traded. 40% of traded deforestation ends up in high-income countries, meaning they are responsible for 12% of deforestation.{ref}If we sum countries’ [imported deforestation](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation) by [World Bank income group](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-banks-income-groups?time=2013&country=IND~IDN), we find that high-income countries were responsible for 40% of imported deforestation; upper-middle income for 25%; lower-middle income for 20%; and low income for 5%. We then get high-income countries' share of deforestation as: [40% of the 29% that is traded], which is equal to 12%.{/ref} Let’s take a look at which countries are causing deforestation overseas and the size of this impact. ## Which countries are causing deforestation overseas? How much do people in rich countries contribute to deforestation overseas? To investigate this question, researchers Florence Pendrill et al. (2019) quantified the deforestation embedded in traded goods between countries.{ref}Pendrill, F., Persson, U. M., Godar, J., & Kastner, T. (2019). [Deforestation displaced: trade in forest-risk commodities and the prospects for a global forest transition](https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0d41). _Environmental Research Letters_, _14_(5), 055003.{/ref} They did this by calculating the amount of deforestation associated with specific food and forestry products, and combining it with a trade model. In the map we see the _net_ deforestation embedded in trade for each country. This is calculated by taking each country’s _imported_ deforestation and subtracting its _exported_ deforestation. Net importers of deforestation (shown in brown) are countries that contribute more to deforestation in other countries than they do in their home country. The consumption choices of people in these countries cause deforestation elsewhere in the world. For example, after we adjust for all the goods that the UK imports and exports, it caused more deforestation elsewhere than it did domestically. It was a net importer. Brazil, in contrast, caused more deforestation domestically in the production of goods for other countries than it imported from elsewhere. It was a net exporter. Although there is some year-to-year variability _[you can explore the data use the timeline on the bottom of the chart from 2005 to 2013]_ we see a reasonably consistent divide: most countries across Europe and North America are net importers of deforestation i.e. they’re driving deforestation elsewhere; whilst many subtropical countries are partly cutting down trees to meet this demand from rich countries. Most deforestation occurs for the production of goods that are consumed within domestic markets. 71% of deforestation is for domestic production. Less than one-third (29%) is for the production of goods that are traded. High-income countries were the largest 'importers' of deforestation, accounting for 40% of it. This means they were responsible for 12% of global deforestation.{ref}If we sum countries’ [imported deforestation](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation) by [World Bank income group](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-banks-income-groups?time=2013&country=IND~IDN), we find that high-income countries were responsible for 40% of imported deforestation; upper-middle income for 25%; lower-middle income for 20%; and low income for 5%. We then get high-income countries' share of deforestation as: [40% of the 29% that is traded], which is equal to 12%.{/ref} It is therefore true that rich countries are causing deforestation in poorer countries. <Chart url="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/net-deforestation-in-trade?stackMode=absolute®ion=World"/> ##### Related charts: ### Imported deforestation https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation ### Exported deforestation https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/exported-deforestation ### Share of deforestation that is exported https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-deforestation-exported ### Share of deforestation that is driven by domestic consumption https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-deforestation-domestic-consumption ## Are countries importing more deforestation than they’re regrowing domestically? Many rich countries are driving deforestation in other parts of the world, but are regrowing forests domestically. 79% of exported deforestation ended up in those countries that had stopped losing domestic forests. How do these two measures compare? Are they causing more deforestation elsewhere than they are regenerating in forests at home? Let’s take an example. Imagine some temperate country was responsible for the deforestation of 25,000 hectares in tropical countries but was restoring its own forests at a rate of 50,000 hectares per year. On balance, it would still have a positive impact on the size of global forests; its net contribution would be increasing forest area by 25,000 hectares.{ref}We would subtract its deforestation (25,000 hectares) from its reforestation (50,000 hectares) to get 25,000 hectares net gain.{/ref} However, this country might still be causing more damage than this for a couple of reasons. Not all forest is equal. Tropical forests are often more productive than temperate forests, meaning they store more carbon. They are also richer sites of biodiversity. And, we might place more value on preserving primary, native forests that haven’t yet been deforested over regrowing forests that have lost their previous ecosystems. Hence, we should keep in mind that forest area is not the only aspect that matters – where that forest is and how rich in life it is matters too. It would be good if there was data available that would capture these additional aspects. We manage to capture some of these differences in carbon in our related article on [**deforestation ****_emissions_**** embedded in trade**](https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-trade). Without reliable metrics that capture all of these differences, we will have to stick with total changes in forest area for now. But we should keep these important aspects in mind when comparing forest losses and gains. In the chart we see the comparison between the change in domestic forest area, and deforestation driven by imported goods.{ref}Data on the annual change in domestic forests is sourced from the UN FAO’s [Forest Resources Assessment](https://fra-data.fao.org/).{/ref} On the vertical axis we have the domestic change in forest area: this is shown only for countries where the forest area is increasing. Since there is often year-to-year variability in deforestation or reforestation rates, this is shown as the five-year average. On the x-axis we have imported deforestation. The grey line marks where the area of domestic regrowth of forests is exactly equal to imported deforestation. Countries that lie along this line would have a net-neutral impact on global forests: the area they are causing to deforestation overseas is exactly as large as the area they are regrowing at home. Countries which lie _above_ the grey line – such as the United States, Finland, China – restore more forest each year domestically than they import from elsewhere. For example, the US ‘imported’ 64,000 hectares of deforested land, but increased its domestic forest area by 275,000 hectares. More than four times as much. On balance, they add to the global forest stock. Countries below the line – such as the UK and Germany – are not growing forests fast enough to offset the deforestation they’re creating elsewhere. The UK ‘imported’ 34,000 hectares of deforestation but increased its domestic forests by only 19,000 hectares. These countries might have high levels of afforestation at home, but they’re still having a net negative impact on the size of the world’s forests. <Chart url="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/domestic-forest-change-vs-imported-deforestation?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=®ion=World"/> ## Rich countries need to be more conscious of how they’re contributing to global deforestation After seeing this data, people might argue that we should cut back on trade. If poorer countries are cutting down forests to make food for rich consumers, then we should just stop trading these goods. But the solution is not so simple. There are other aspects to consider. International trade is important for socioeconomic development. Many farmers rely on international buyers to earn a living and improve their livelihoods. Not only would this be bad for people, it might also be bad for forests. One of the reasons poorer countries clear forest to make room for farmland is that they achieve low [crop yields](http://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields). If you struggle to increase crop yields but want to produce more food, then expanding your agricultural land is the only option. This often comes at the cost of forests. Improvements in agricultural productivity tends to both drive and follow [economic growth](http://ourworldindata.org/economic-growth). International trade plays an important role in this growth, and may allow farmers to see the yield gains they need to produce more food using less land. So, what can we do? One option is to adopt stricter guidelines on what suppliers to source from, and implementing zero-deforestation policies that stop the trade of goods that have been produced on deforested land. Another way that richer countries can contribute is by investing in technologies – such as improved seed varieties, fertilizers and agricultural practices – that allow farmers to increase yields. That’s both an economic and environmental win. The first step in doing this is for rich countries to monitor their deforestation impacts overseas more closely. They should keep their domestic reforestation targets in perspective with their net impact on global forests. Sometimes these restoration programmes pale in comparison to the deforestation they’re driving elsewhere. ## _More of our articles on Forests and Deforestation..._ ### Cutting down forests: what are the drivers of deforestation? https://ourworldindata.org/drivers-of-deforestation#cutting-down-forests-what-are-the-drivers-of-deforestation ### Forest Transitions: why do we lose then regain forests? https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#forest-transitions-why-do-we-lose-then-regain-forests ### Carbon emissions from deforestation: are they driven by domestic demand or international trade? https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-tradehttps://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-trade | {
"id": 40057,
"date": "2021-03-01T11:30:00",
"guid": {
"rendered": "https://owid.cloud/?p=40057"
},
"link": "https://owid.cloud/exporting-deforestation",
"meta": {
"owid_publication_context_meta_field": {
"latest": true,
"homepage": true,
"immediate_newsletter": true
}
},
"slug": "exporting-deforestation",
"tags": [],
"type": "post",
"title": {
"rendered": "Do rich countries import deforestation from overseas?"
},
"_links": {
"self": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/posts/40057"
}
],
"about": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/types/post"
}
],
"author": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/users/17",
"embeddable": true
}
],
"curies": [
{
"href": "https://api.w.org/{rel}",
"name": "wp",
"templated": true
}
],
"replies": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/comments?post=40057",
"embeddable": true
}
],
"wp:term": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/categories?post=40057",
"taxonomy": "category",
"embeddable": true
},
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/tags?post=40057",
"taxonomy": "post_tag",
"embeddable": true
}
],
"collection": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/posts"
}
],
"wp:attachment": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/media?parent=40057"
}
],
"version-history": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/posts/40057/revisions",
"count": 12
}
],
"wp:featuredmedia": [
{
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/media/40998",
"embeddable": true
}
],
"predecessor-version": [
{
"id": 50861,
"href": "https://owid.cloud/wp-json/wp/v2/posts/40057/revisions/50861"
}
]
},
"author": 17,
"format": "standard",
"status": "publish",
"sticky": false,
"content": {
"rendered": "\n<div class=\"blog-info\">\n<p>Our World in Data presents the data and research to make progress against the world\u2019s largest problems.<br>This blog post draws on data and research discussed in our entry on <strong><a href=\"https://ourworldindata.org/forests-and-deforestation\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Forests and Deforestation</a></strong>.</p>\n</div>\n\n\n\t<div class=\"wp-block-owid-summary\">\n\t\t<h2>Summary</h2>\n\t\t\n\n<p>Forests in many rich countries have been expanding in recent decades. But, consumers in high-income countries can also contribute to the loss of forests overseas by buying agricultural products that were produced on deforested land. 12% of deforestation was driven by demand from rich countries. To account for the impact that a particular country has on the global forests it makes sense to compare the domestic forest change with the outsourced impact on forests. </p>\n\n\n\n<p>Some countries, such as the US, Finland and China, are regrowing their forests at a much faster rate than imported deforestation \u2013 consumption in these countries allows the forests on net to expand. But others, such as the UK, Germany and Spain, create more deforestation in other countries than they restore at home \u2013 consumers in these countries are driving a net loss in global forests.</p>\n\n\n\t</div>\n\n\n<p>There is a marked divide in the state of the world\u2019s forests. In most rich countries, across Europe, North America and East Asia, <a href=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/change-forest-vs-gdp?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=&region=World\">forest cover is increasing</a>, whilst in many low-to-middle income countries it\u2019s decreasing.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>But, it would be wrong to think that the only impact rich countries have on global forests is through changes in their domestic forests. They also contribute to global deforestation through the foods they import from poorer countries.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>Today, most deforestation occurs in the tropics. 71% of this is driven by demand in domestic markets, and the remaining 29% for the production of products that are traded. 40% of traded deforestation ends up in high-income countries, meaning they are responsible for 12% of deforestation.{ref}If we sum countries\u2019 <a href=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation\">imported deforestation</a> by <a href=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-banks-income-groups?time=2013&country=IND~IDN\">World Bank income group</a>, we find that high-income countries were responsible for 40% of imported deforestation; upper-middle income for 25%; lower-middle income for 20%; and low income for 5%.<br><br>We then get high-income countries’ share of deforestation as: [40% of the 29% that is traded], which is equal to 12%.{/ref}</p>\n\n\n\n<p>Let\u2019s take a look at which countries are causing deforestation overseas and the size of this impact.</p>\n\n\n\n<h4>Which countries are causing deforestation overseas?</h4>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column\">\n<p>How much do people in rich countries contribute to deforestation overseas?</p>\n\n\n\n<p>To investigate this question, researchers Florence Pendrill et al. (2019) quantified the deforestation embedded in traded goods between countries.{ref}Pendrill, F., Persson, U. M., Godar, J., & Kastner, T. (2019). <a href=\"https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0d41\">Deforestation displaced: trade in forest-risk commodities and the prospects for a global forest transition</a>. <em>Environmental Research Letters</em>, <em>14</em>(5), 055003.{/ref} They did this by calculating the amount of deforestation associated with specific food and forestry products, and combining it with a trade model.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the map we see the <em>net</em> deforestation embedded in trade for each country. This is calculated by taking each country\u2019s <em>imported</em> deforestation and subtracting its <em>exported</em> deforestation. Net importers of deforestation (shown in brown) are countries that contribute more to deforestation in other countries than they do in their home country. The consumption choices of people in these countries cause deforestation elsewhere in the world.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>For example, after we adjust for all the goods that the UK imports and exports, it caused more deforestation elsewhere than it did domestically. It was a net importer. Brazil, in contrast, caused more deforestation domestically in the production of goods for other countries than it imported from elsewhere. It was a net exporter.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>Although there is some year-to-year variability <em>[you can explore the data use the timeline on the bottom of the chart from 2005 to 2013]</em> we see a reasonably consistent divide: most countries across Europe and North America are net importers of deforestation i.e. they\u2019re driving deforestation elsewhere; whilst many subtropical countries are partly cutting down trees to meet this demand from rich countries. </p>\n\n\n\n<p>Most deforestation occurs for the production of goods that are consumed within domestic markets. 71% of deforestation is for domestic production. Less than one-third (29%) is for the production of goods that are traded.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>High-income countries were the largest ‘importers’ of deforestation, accounting for 40% of it. This means they were responsible for 12% of global deforestation.{ref}If we sum countries\u2019 <a href=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation\">imported deforestation</a> by <a href=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-banks-income-groups?time=2013&country=IND~IDN\">World Bank income group</a>, we find that high-income countries were responsible for 40% of imported deforestation; upper-middle income for 25%; lower-middle income for 20%; and low income for 5%.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>We then get high-income countries’ share of deforestation as: [40% of the 29% that is traded], which is equal to 12%.{/ref} It is therefore true that rich countries are causing deforestation in poorer countries.</p>\n</div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column\">\n<iframe src=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/net-deforestation-in-trade?stackMode=absolute&region=World\" loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 600px; border: 0px none;\"></iframe>\n\n\n\n<h5>Related charts:</h5>\n\n\n <block type=\"prominent-link\" style=\"is-style-thin\">\n <link-url>https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/imported-deforestation</link-url>\n <title>Imported deforestation</title>\n <content></content>\n <figure></figure>\n </block>\n\n <block type=\"prominent-link\" style=\"is-style-thin\">\n <link-url>https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/exported-deforestation</link-url>\n <title>Exported deforestation</title>\n <content></content>\n <figure></figure>\n </block>\n\n <block type=\"prominent-link\" style=\"is-style-thin\">\n <link-url>https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-deforestation-exported</link-url>\n <title>Share of deforestation that is exported</title>\n <content></content>\n <figure></figure>\n </block>\n\n <block type=\"prominent-link\" style=\"is-style-thin\">\n <link-url>https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-deforestation-domestic-consumption</link-url>\n <title>Share of deforestation that is driven by domestic consumption</title>\n <content></content>\n <figure></figure>\n </block></div>\n</div>\n\n\n\n<h4>Are countries importing more deforestation than they\u2019re regrowing domestically?</h4>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column\">\n<p>Many rich countries are driving deforestation in other parts of the world, but are regrowing forests domestically. 79% of exported deforestation ended up in those countries that had stopped losing domestic forests.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>How do these two measures compare? Are they causing more deforestation elsewhere than they are regenerating in forests at home? </p>\n\n\n\n<p>Let\u2019s take an example. Imagine some temperate country was responsible for the deforestation of 25,000 hectares in tropical countries but was restoring its own forests at a rate of 50,000 hectares per year. On balance, it would still have a positive impact on the size of global forests; its net contribution would be increasing forest area by 25,000 hectares.{ref}We would subtract its deforestation (25,000 hectares) from its reforestation (50,000 hectares) to get 25,000 hectares net gain.{/ref} However, this country might still be causing more damage than this for a couple of reasons. Not all forest is equal. Tropical forests are often more productive than temperate forests, meaning they store more carbon. They are also richer sites of biodiversity. And, we might place more value on preserving primary, native forests that haven\u2019t yet been deforested over regrowing forests that have lost their previous ecosystems. Hence, we should keep in mind that forest area is not the only aspect that matters \u2013 where that forest is and how rich in life it is matters too.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>It would be good if there was data available that would capture these additional aspects. We manage to capture some of these differences in carbon in our related article on <a href=\"https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-trade\"><strong>deforestation </strong><strong><em>emissions</em></strong><strong> embedded in trade</strong></a>. Without reliable metrics that capture all of these differences, we will have to stick with total changes in forest area for now. But we should keep these important aspects in mind when comparing forest losses and gains.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the chart we see the comparison between the change in domestic forest area, and deforestation driven by imported goods.{ref}Data on the annual change in domestic forests is sourced from the UN FAO\u2019s <a href=\"https://fra-data.fao.org/\">Forest Resources Assessment</a>.{/ref} On the vertical axis we have the domestic change in forest area: this is shown only for countries where the forest area is increasing. Since there is often year-to-year variability in deforestation or reforestation rates, this is shown as the five-year average. On the x-axis we have imported deforestation. The grey line marks where the area of domestic regrowth of forests is exactly equal to imported deforestation. Countries that lie along this line would have a net-neutral impact on global forests: the area they are causing to deforestation overseas is exactly as large as the area they are regrowing at home.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>Countries which lie <em>above</em> the grey line \u2013 such as the United States, Finland, China \u2013 restore more forest each year domestically than they import from elsewhere. For example, the US \u2018imported\u2019 64,000 hectares of deforested land, but increased its domestic forest area by 275,000 hectares. More than four times as much. On balance, they add to the global forest stock. </p>\n\n\n\n<p>Countries below the line \u2013 such as the UK and Germany \u2013 are not growing forests fast enough to offset the deforestation they\u2019re creating elsewhere. The UK \u2018imported\u2019 34,000 hectares of deforestation but increased its domestic forests by only 19,000 hectares. These countries might have high levels of afforestation at home, but they\u2019re still having a net negative impact on the size of the world\u2019s forests.</p>\n</div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column\">\n<iframe src=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/domestic-forest-change-vs-imported-deforestation?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=&region=World\" loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 600px; border: 0px none;\"></iframe>\n</div>\n</div>\n\n\n\n<h4>Rich countries need to be more conscious of how they\u2019re contributing to global deforestation</h4>\n\n\n\n<p>After seeing this data, people might argue that we should cut back on trade. If poorer countries are cutting down forests to make food for rich consumers, then we should just stop trading these goods.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>But the solution is not so simple. There are other aspects to consider. International trade is important for socioeconomic development. Many farmers rely on international buyers to earn a living and improve their livelihoods. Not only would this be bad for people, it might also be bad for forests. </p>\n\n\n\n<p>One of the reasons poorer countries clear forest to make room for farmland is that they achieve low <a href=\"http://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields\">crop yields</a>. If you struggle to increase crop yields but want to produce more food, then expanding your agricultural land is the only option. This often comes at the cost of forests. Improvements in agricultural productivity tends to both drive and follow <a href=\"http://ourworldindata.org/economic-growth\">economic growth</a>. International trade plays an important role in this growth, and may allow farmers to see the yield gains they need to produce more food using less land.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>So, what can we do? </p>\n\n\n\n<p>One option is to adopt stricter guidelines on what suppliers to source from, and implementing zero-deforestation policies that stop the trade of goods that have been produced on deforested land. Another way that richer countries can contribute is by investing in technologies \u2013 such as improved seed varieties, fertilizers and agricultural practices \u2013 that allow farmers to increase yields. That\u2019s both an economic and environmental win.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>The first step in doing this is for rich countries to monitor their deforestation impacts overseas more closely. They should keep their domestic reforestation targets in perspective with their net impact on global forests. Sometimes these restoration programmes pale in comparison to the deforestation they\u2019re driving elsewhere.</p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator\"/>\n\n\n\n<h4><em>More of our articles on Forests and Deforestation…</em></h4>\n\n\n <block type=\"prominent-link\" style=\"is-style-thin\">\n <link-url>https://ourworldindata.org/drivers-of-deforestation#cutting-down-forests-what-are-the-drivers-of-deforestation</link-url>\n <title>Cutting down forests: what are the drivers of deforestation?</title>\n <content></content>\n <figure><img width=\"768\" height=\"402\" src=\"https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/deforestation-drivers-thumbnail-01-768x402.png\" class=\"attachment-medium_large size-medium_large\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" srcset=\"https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/deforestation-drivers-thumbnail-01-768x402.png 768w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/deforestation-drivers-thumbnail-01-400x209.png 400w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/deforestation-drivers-thumbnail-01-800x419.png 800w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/deforestation-drivers-thumbnail-01-150x79.png 150w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/deforestation-drivers-thumbnail-01.png 1200w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 768px) 100vw, 768px\" /></figure>\n </block>\n\n <block type=\"prominent-link\" style=\"is-style-thin\">\n <link-url>https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#forest-transitions-why-do-we-lose-then-regain-forests</link-url>\n <title>Forest Transitions: why do we lose then regain forests?</title>\n <content></content>\n <figure><img width=\"768\" height=\"1\" src=\"https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/forest-area-as-share-of-land-area-2.svg\" class=\"attachment-medium_large size-medium_large\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" height=\"600\" width=\"850\" /></figure>\n </block>\n\n <block type=\"prominent-link\" style=\"is-style-thin\">\n <link-url>https://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-tradehttps://ourworldindata.org/deforestation#carbon-emissions-from-deforestation-are-they-driven-by-domestic-demand-or-international-trade</link-url>\n <title>Carbon emissions from deforestation: are they driven by domestic demand or international trade?</title>\n <content></content>\n <figure><img width=\"768\" height=\"882\" src=\"https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/Deforestation-emissions-in-trade-\u2013-Sankey-01-768x882.png\" class=\"attachment-medium_large size-medium_large\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" srcset=\"https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/Deforestation-emissions-in-trade-\u2013-Sankey-01-768x882.png 768w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/Deforestation-emissions-in-trade-\u2013-Sankey-01-348x400.png 348w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/Deforestation-emissions-in-trade-\u2013-Sankey-01-479x550.png 479w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/Deforestation-emissions-in-trade-\u2013-Sankey-01-131x150.png 131w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/Deforestation-emissions-in-trade-\u2013-Sankey-01-1338x1536.png 1338w, https://owid.cloud/app/uploads/2021/02/Deforestation-emissions-in-trade-\u2013-Sankey-01.png 1493w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 768px) 100vw, 768px\" /></figure>\n </block>",
"protected": false
},
"excerpt": {
"rendered": "Rich countries import foods produced on deforested land in the tropics. How much deforestation do they import?",
"protected": false
},
"date_gmt": "2021-03-01T11:30:00",
"modified": "2022-04-27T17:14:45",
"template": "",
"categories": [
1
],
"ping_status": "closed",
"authors_name": [
"Hannah Ritchie"
],
"modified_gmt": "2022-04-27T16:14:45",
"comment_status": "closed",
"featured_media": 40998,
"featured_media_paths": {
"thumbnail": "/app/uploads/2021/02/net-deforestation-in-trade-150x74.png",
"medium_large": "/app/uploads/2021/02/net-deforestation-in-trade-768x378.png"
}
} |
