Global S&T Development Trend Analysis Platform of Resources and Environment
DOI | 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.11.003 |
Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments | |
Garrett, R. D.1,2; Levy, S.1,2; Carlson, K. M.3; Gardner, T. A.4; Godar, J.4; Clapp, J.5; Dauvergne, P.6; Heilmayr, R.7; de Waroux, Y. le Polain8,9; Ayre, B.10; Barr, R.11; Dovre, B.10; Gibbs, H. K.12,13; Hall, S.14; Lake, S.10; Milder, J. C.15,16; Rausch, L. L.13; Rivero, R.3; Rueda, X.17; Sarsfield, R.18; Soarer-Filho, B.19; Villoria, N.20 | |
2019 | |
发表期刊 | GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS
![]() |
ISSN | 0959-3780 |
EISSN | 1872-9495 |
出版年 | 2019 |
卷号 | 54页码:135-147 |
文章类型 | Article |
语种 | 英语 |
国家 | USA; Sweden; Canada; England; Colombia; Brazil |
英文摘要 | Zero-deforestation commitments are a type of voluntary sustainability initiative that companies adopt to signal their intention to reduce or eliminate deforestation associated with commodities that they produce, trade, and/or sell. Because each company defines its own zero-deforestation commitment goals and implementation mechanisms, commitment content varies widely. This creates challenges for the assessment of commitment implementation or effectiveness. Here, we develop criteria to assess the potential effectiveness of zero-deforestation commitments at reducing deforestation within a company supply chain, regionally, and globally. We apply these criteria to evaluate 52 zero-deforestation commitments made by companies identified by Forest 500 as having high deforestation risk. While our assessment indicates that existing commitments converge with several criteria for effectiveness, they fall short in a few key ways. First, they cover just a small share of the global market for deforestation-risk commodities, which means that their global impact is likely to be small. Second, biome-wide implementation is only achieved in the Brazilian Amazon. Outside this region, implementation occurs mainly through certification programs, which are not adopted by all producers and lack third-party near-real time deforestation monitoring. Additionally, around half of all commitments include zero-net deforestation targets and future implementation deadlines, both of which are design elements that may reduce effectiveness. Zero-net targets allow promises of future reforestation to compensate for current forest loss, while future implementation deadlines allow for preemptive clearing. To increase the likelihood that commitments will lead to reduced deforestation across all scales, more companies should adopt zero-gross deforestation targets with immediate implementation deadlines and clear sanction-based implementation mechanisms in biomes with high risk of forest to commodity conversion. |
英文关键词 | Agriculture Forestry Supply chain Conservation Voluntary environmental policies Sustainability standards |
领域 | 气候变化 |
收录类别 | SCI-E ; SSCI |
WOS记录号 | WOS:000458468400014 |
WOS关键词 | LAND-USE CHANGE ; VOLUNTARY ENVIRONMENTAL-PROGRAMS ; MARKET-DRIVEN GOVERNANCE ; RESOLUTION GLOBAL-MAPS ; FOREST DEGRADATION ; AGRICULTURAL LAND ; PALM OIL ; CERTIFICATION ; SOY ; SUSTAINABILITY |
WOS类目 | Environmental Sciences ; Environmental Studies ; Geography |
WOS研究方向 | Environmental Sciences & Ecology ; Geography |
引用统计 | |
文献类型 | 期刊论文 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.173/C666/handle/2XK7JSWQ/38343 |
专题 | 气候变化 |
作者单位 | 1.Boston Univ, Dept Earth & Environm, Boston, MA 02215 USA; 2.Boston Univ, Global Dev Policy Ctr, Boston, MA 02215 USA; 3.Univ Hawaii, Dept Nat Resources & Environm Management, Honolulu, HI 96822 USA; 4.Stockholm Environm Inst, Stockholm, Sweden; 5.Univ Waterloo, Sch Environm Resources & Sustainabil, Waterloo, ON, Canada; 6.Univ British Columbia, Dept Polit Sci, Vancouver, BC, Canada; 7.Univ Calif Santa Barbara, Bren Sch Environm Sci & Management, Environm Studies Program, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA; 8.McGill Univ, Inst Study Int Dev, Montreal, PQ, Canada; 9.McGill Univ, Dept Geog, Montreal, PQ, Canada; 10.Global Canopy, Oxford, England; 11.N Amer Off Forest Trust TFT, Seattle, WA USA; 12.Univ Wisconsin, Dept Geog, Madison, WI 53706 USA; 13.Univ Wisconsin, Nelson Inst Environm Studies, Madison, WI USA; 14.Natl Advocacy Ctr, Natl Wildlife Federat, Washington, DC USA; 15.Rainforest Alliance, New York, NY USA; 16.Cornell Univ, Dept Nat Resources, Fernow Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA; 17.World Resources Inst, Global Forest Watch, Washington, DC 20006 USA; 18.Univ Los Andes, Sch Management, Bogota, Colombia; 19.Univ Fed Minas Gerais, Ctr Sensoriamento Remoto, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil; 20.Kansas State Univ, Dept Agr Econ, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Garrett, R. D.,Levy, S.,Carlson, K. M.,et al. Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments[J]. GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS,2019,54:135-147. |
APA | Garrett, R. D..,Levy, S..,Carlson, K. M..,Gardner, T. A..,Godar, J..,...&Villoria, N..(2019).Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments.GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS,54,135-147. |
MLA | Garrett, R. D.,et al."Criteria for effective zero-deforestation commitments".GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS 54(2019):135-147. |
条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。
修改评论