The destruction of primary tropical forest has been proceeding at a steady pace for some years now. In 2021, the area lost amounted to 3.75 million hectares.
During 2021, the tropical regions of our planet lost a tree-covered area the size of 11.1 million hectares, slightly less than the surface area of Honduras. 3.75 million hectares (roughly the combined area of Israel and Kuwait) were primary tropical forest — the most important type in terms of biodiversity and greenhouse gas storage — which was therefore destroyed at a rate of 10 football pitches per minute. This means that 2.5 gigatonnes of CO2 were released into the atmosphere, equivalent to India's annual fossil fuel emissions. The data were processed by the University of Maryland for the Global Forest Watch of the World Resources Institute.
The first figure (11.1 million hectares) refers to all areas covered by trees taller than five metres, including planted ones. For the first time, the University of Maryland was able to assess in detail the impact of wildfires; although they do not technically cause a permanent change in land use, they do emit greenhouse gases and can trigger a vicious cycle, as flames spread more rapidly when vegetation is already dry.
Global Forest Watch focuses in particular on primary tropical forests — those that have not yet been affected by agricultural or industrial activity. This is for two reasons. First, almost 97 per cent of permanent deforestation associated with urbanisation, agriculture and the production of other raw materials has been concentrated there; in boreal or temperate climate zones, by contrast, such loss is often temporary and reversible, being linked primarily to wildfires and timber extraction. Second, untouched tropical forests have a greater capacity to absorb CO2, thereby mitigating climate change.
The destruction of primary tropical forest has been proceeding at a steady pace for some years now. In 2021, the area lost was 11 per cent lower than in 2020, a year that had nonetheless seen a 12 per cent increase on 2019 (driven mainly by wildfires).
At the top of the list is Brazil, with 1.5 million hectares in 2021, accounting for 40 per cent of the global total — roughly the surface area of Calabria. And yet not so long ago the administration had managed to bring the deforestation curve down, keeping it well below one million hectares for several years between 2008 and 2015. Since 2016, however, a new surge has taken hold with no sign of abating. In the most recent year, wildfires declined (0.61 million hectares in 2020, 0.36 million in 2021) but, conversely, deforestation due to other causes — primarily agriculture — increased (from 1.09 to 1.19 million hectares). In western Amazonia, new deforestation hotspots are emerging, often coinciding with pastures along roadsides.
When examining these figures, it should be borne in mind that the methodology adopted by the University of Maryland differs from that of Prodes, the government's monitoring programme.
The case of Indonesia, by contrast, is radically different. The deforestation rate fell for the fifth consecutive year — and not by a small margin, but by a significant 25 per cent compared to 2020. In its new emissions reduction plan (nationally determined contributions, NDC), the country is even pledging to become a net greenhouse gas sink by 2030.
The change of course dates back to 2015, the year in which a catastrophic wildfire season prompted the government to introduce two moratoriums: a temporary one on licences for new oil palm plantations (now expired) and a permanent one on the conversion of primary forests and peatlands. These decisions have borne fruit, and have been accompanied by an intensification of fire monitoring and prevention activities. Today, 83 per cent of Indonesian and Malaysian palm oil, and 80 per cent of paper and pulp, are produced in compliance with no deforestation, no peat and no exploitation (NDPE) policies.
All measures that, the World Resources Institute argues, will need to be strengthened further. Especially now that the temporary moratorium on new plantations has expired and palm oil prices have reached their highest levels in forty years. The government has recently revoked hundreds of licences for logging, plantations and mining activities in forested areas: it remains to be seen, however, whether these will be redistributed to indigenous peoples or to large corporations. The need to revive the economy following the pandemic crisis could weigh on that decision.
The ranking of countries with the most severe primary tropical forest loss places the Democratic Republic of Congo in second position, with close to 500,000 hectares. The World Resources Institute is calling for "major changes", including "development pathways that do not involve expanding agriculture into primary forests" and "affordable clean energy" for rural communities, "to reduce dependence on charcoal and other forms of wood-based energy".
In third place, Indonesia is displaced by Bolivia, which in 2021 set a negative record with 291,000 hectares of primary tropical forest destroyed. Around a third of the deforestation recorded over the past three years is attributable to wildfires. These are often deliberately set to clear land and then spiral out of control due to the hot, dry climate.
At COP26 in Glasgow, the leaders of one hundred nations (later rising to 141 in the weeks that followed) formally committed to halting deforestation and land degradation by the end of the decade. To fulfil this pledge, however, the deforestation rate would need to decline steadily every year for the remainder of the century — something that is not happening in the tropics. The only positive exceptions are Indonesia and Malaysia, followed by Gabon and Guyana (which over the past two decades have lost just 1 per cent of their primary tropical forest).
The data are therefore "tragic", but not all is lost. The World Resources Institute proposes four strategies to end deforestation by 2030. First of all, we must take advantage of an enormous advantage we have over the past: we now have accurate data on the scale of the phenomenon, on the areas involved and on the causes too. This knowledge must be translated into targeted policies. Data can also prove useful to companies, as it allows them to purchase raw materials only from territories where the risk of deforestation appears reasonably low.
Secondly, it is true that the drivers of deforestation (such as the commodities trade) are global, but it is equally true that interventions are predominantly local. Acting is often complicated because resources, expertise and budgets are lacking, but history teaches us that it is political will that makes the difference. What does this consideration suggest? That we must build awareness of the fact that deforestation causes damage and that, conversely, forest protection brings benefits — for the territory as a whole, and for those who live in it.
To push in this direction, several programmes have been launched aimed, for example, at assigning a monetary value to the CO2 stored in forests, or at excluding deforestation-linked products from supply chains and financial portfolios. "It is essential to rigorously measure the ultimate impacts of these initiatives on forests as they progress, and to refine our strategies accordingly," writes the World Resources Institute. Finally, we must acknowledge the fact that forests are vulnerable to rising temperatures, extreme weather events, parasitic infections and ot
