̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - Rachael Garrett

New long-term collaboration with Suzano begins with a £10 million donation to support conservation and sustainability education and research

plc32 — Fri, 15 Nov 2024 16:05:37 +0000

An initial £10 million donation will be used to support education and research into areas including the conservation of biodiversity, enhancing business sustainability, and the restoration of natural habitats in Brazil and beyond. ̽��ֱ��agreement will establish the Suzano Scholars Fund, a perpetual endowment at Jesus College to fund Brazilian nationals studying for a postgraduate degree at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge connected to the environment, ecology and conservation, educating the next generation of sustainability experts and leaders. Funding will also be provided to academics based at the Conservation Research Institute to undertake research projects exploring the interaction between human and natural systems in areas such as biodiversity, climate change, water resource management, and ecosystem restoration. Read more about this new initiative here

Suzano, one the world’s largest producers of bio-based raw materials, based in São Paulo, Brazil, establishes a long-term initiative with Jesus College and the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

This visionary initiative will help to build strong links between the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and Brazil

Professor Bhaskar Vira

Suzano

Green forests stretch out to the horizon

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Cambridge is forging a future for our planet

lw355 — Mon, 21 Oct 2024 09:00:36 +0000

Find out how Cambridge's pioneering research in climate and nature is regenerating nature, rewiring energy, rethinking transport and redefining economics – forging a future for our planet.

Changemakers: Rachael Garrett and the Conservation Research Institute

lkm37 — Mon, 21 Oct 2024 08:42:11 +0000

Meet Rachael Garrett: land scientist, forest wanderer and Director of the Conservation Research Institute.

Sir David Attenborough's 'joy' on visit to Cambridge Conservation Initiative

plc32 — Fri, 27 Sep 2024 16:01:44 +0000

Sir David said of visiting CCI that he felt “an undercurrent of joy” whenever he came to the conservation campus, which is housed in the building bearing his own name.

̽��ֱ��campus was opened in 2016 and is the first of its kind, with over 500 conservation professionals and researchers, from 10 different organisations and the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, all collaborating to stop the biodiversity crisis and build more hopeful futures for people and nature.

Read the full story: 'An Undercurrent of Joy'

Sir David Attenborough spoke of how he feels during visits to the Cambridge Conservation Initiative (CCI) when he stopped by the CCI conservation campus at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge this week.

Cambridge Conservation Initiative

Photo of Sir David Attenborough on a visit to Cambridge Conservation Research Initiative

Yes

A new way of thinking about the economy could help protect the Amazon, and help its people thrive

sc604 — Tue, 06 Aug 2024 09:00:33 +0000

A group of conservationists from Bolivia, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, the US and the UK say that current conservation and development efforts will never sustain or scale without systemic changes in how economies are designed.

Despite extensive destruction of the Amazon in the name of economic development, Amazonian communities have seen little improvement in income, life expectancy, and education. ̽��ֱ��researchers have proposed a new model and associated policy changes that could create fair and sustainable futures for the Amazon and its people by improving infrastructure, supply chains, and social organisations.

Their results, reported in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution, are focused on the Amazon, however the researchers say similar economic models could be implemented around the world if the political will exists.

̽��ֱ��Amazon basin is home to the world’s largest tropical rainforest, representing over half of the world’s remaining rainforest, and stores vast amounts of carbon. However, decades of large-scale deforestation, as well as the increased risk of fires and floods due to climate change, has put much of the Amazon rainforest under threat. In addition to what the loss of the Amazon would mean for global carbon emissions, the rainforest is also home to many indigenous peoples and thousands of species of plants and animals.

“We need a different vision for the Amazon if we’re going to protect it,” said lead author Professor Rachael Garrett from the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge’s Department of Geography and the Conservation Research Institute. “Half a century of deforestation and exploitation of the Amazon has not resulted in widespread development, and now the economic value of deforested areas is threatened, not to mention the threats to the global climate and water security.”

Working with colleagues from the Amazonian region, Garrett has proposed building on the success of indigenous and traditional communities to develop new economies, which could protect much of the Amazon while also improving the livelihoods, health, and food security of the many people who live there. These economic models are known as socio-bioeconomies, or SBEs.

“Conventional economic models can result in short-term gains, but over the longer term, the people and resources of the Amazon basin have been exploited by powerful interests, while there has been an underinvestment in education, innovation, and sustainable infrastructure,” said Garrett. “ ̽��ֱ��conventional economic model is simply not sustainable.”

̽��ֱ��SBE model is focused on using and restoring Amazonian and other ecosystems sustainably, and supporting indigenous and rural communities. An SBE economy might include eco-friendly tourism, or the sustainable harvest and processing of plant products into valuable foods, beverages, clothing, and medicines.

“A limited range of interests are controlling the development agenda in most countries,” said Garrett. “ ̽��ֱ��only way we can change that is improving the rights and representation of the people who are not benefiting from the systems and are being harmed by ongoing environmental destruction. We believe it is possible to have win-wins for humanity and conservation, but not if we continue to consume products that have a massively negative impact. SBEs can help put these win-wins into policy and practice.”

Garrett cites the footwear brand Veja as an example of such a win-win. ̽��ֱ��French company buys the rubber for its trainers from small-scale Amazonian rubber farmers, and purchases 100% of the responsibly harvested native rubber in Brazil. As part of its sustainability efforts, the company focuses on building communities of small-scale farmers and has been financially successful without traditional advertising.

Garrett and her collaborators are calling for massive increases in social mobilisation, technology and infrastructure to support SBEs. Under an SBE model, governmental subsidies would be redirected away from agribusiness and toward smaller-scale sustainable development. ̽��ֱ��researchers also outline how to build connections between rural and urban policies in SBEs. An example is the establishment of public procurement programmes where healthy and sustainably produced foods are purchased directly from indigenous and small farming communities and served in school lunch programmes and hospitals, instead of supporting large-scale agribusiness engaged in degrading practices.

Other policy changes that could support an SBE model include redirecting finance to conservation and restoration activities, supporting community enterprises, and ensuring participatory processes to ensure inclusive, long-term benefits.

“It’s possible to have an economy that is strong and works for everyone when we dare to develop new models and visions that recognise the interconnectedness of people and nature,” said Garrett. “By popularising these ideas, investing in people and businesses who are making a difference, and supporting research into SBE innovation we can support a transformation in both conservation and development in the Amazon.

“ ̽��ֱ��SBE model could help protect the Amazon and its people while avoiding climate and biodiversity disasters, but there needs to be the political will to make it happen.”

Rachael Garrett is the incoming director of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge Conservation Research Institute and a Fellow of Homerton College, Cambridge. She is a council member of the Cambridge Conservation Initiative and serves on the UN Science Panel for the Amazon.

Reference:
Rachael Garrett et al. ‘Transformative changes are needed to support socio-bioeconomies for people and ecosystems in the Amazon.’ Nature Ecology and Evolution (2024). DOI: 10.1038/s41559-024-02467-9

To protect the Amazon and support the wellbeing of its people, its economy needs to shift from environmentally harmful production to a model built around the diversity of indigenous and rural communities, and standing forests.

luoman via Getty Images

Man extracts latex from a tree in the middle of the Amazon.

Yes

Lack of evidence hampers progress on corporate-led ecosystem restoration

jg533 — Fri, 08 Sep 2023 07:47:52 +0000

An international team of scientists has analysed publicly available sustainability reports released by 100 of the world’s largest companies and found that despite many businesses claiming to actively rebuild damaged ecosystems, very little is known about what is actually being achieved.

Efforts to rebuild degraded environments are vital for achieving global biodiversity targets, and corporate-led projects offer huge potential to restore damaged and lost ecosystems around the globe.

But the study reveals that over 90 percent of corporate-led restoration projects fail to report a single ecological outcome. Around 80 percent of projects do not reveal how much money is invested in restoration, and a third fail to even state the area of habitat that they aim to restore.

̽��ֱ��United Nations has launched a Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, and in recent years businesses around the world have collectively pledged to plant billions of trees, hundreds of thousands of corals and tens of thousands of mangroves. Around two thirds of the top 100 largest global corporations undertake ecosystem restoration.

̽��ֱ��study is published in the journal Science.

“Ultimately, if big businesses are going to contribute effectively to the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, there needs to be transparency and consistency in reporting,” said Professor Rachael Garrett, Moran Professor of Conservation and Development at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge Conservation Research Institute, and a co-author of the report.

She added: “This is in the interest of the businesses themselves, who stand to gain from demonstrating to their customers, shareholders, employees and the wider public that they are making meaningful impacts with their declared restoration efforts.

“ ̽��ֱ��world’s largest corporations have the potential to lift ecosystem restoration efforts to an unprecedented scale. But their involvement has to be managed with proper evidence and accountability, to make sure the outcomes are beneficial and fair for everyone.”

Many countries require businesses to conduct Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) to quantify and reduce their environmental damage, and other private-sector initiatives also encourage companies to measure and disclose their biodiversity impacts. However, the study finds that current guidelines and legal frameworks around ecosystem restoration are inadequate, and are not yet resulting in appropriate reporting by businesses.

̽��ֱ��researchers are calling for more transparency around the reporting of corporate-led ecosystem restoration projects, and for reporting to be more consistently centred around scientific principles that determine ecosystem restoration success.

“Restoring degraded ecosystems is an urgent challenge for this decade, and big businesses have the potential to play a vital role,” said Dr Tim Lamont at Lancaster ̽��ֱ��, lead author of the study.

He added: "With their size, resources and logistics expertise, they could help deliver the large-scale restoration we need in many places. But at the moment there is very little transparency, which makes it hard for anyone to assess if projects are delivering benefits for ecosystems or people.

“When a business says it has planted thousands of trees to restore habitat and soak up carbon – how do we know if this has been delivered, if the trees will survive, and if it has resulted in a functioning ecosystem that benefits biodiversity and people? In many cases, we’ve found that the evidence provided by large corporations to support their claims is insufficient.”

̽��ֱ��researchers say new improved reporting guidelines around ecosystem restoration should:

Recommend that companies clearly differentiate between restoration activities that merely mitigate the negative environmental impacts of a business’ operations from those that aim to provide wider climate, biodiversity and social justice outcomes.
Recommend a principle-based approach, drawing from conservation science, for planning and reporting, so that restoration projects in a range of different contexts can all maintain high standards across core areas.
Ensure corporations engage with and empower local stakeholders to co-design restoration projects from the outset.

Reference

Lamont, T, et al: 'Hold big business to task on ecosystem restoration: corporate reporting must embrace holistic principles from restoration science.' Sept 2023, Science. DOI: 10.1126/science.adh2610

Adapted from a press release by Lancaster ̽��ֱ��.

A near total lack of transparency is making it impossible to assess the quality of corporate-led ecosystem restoration projects, a new study finds.

̽��ֱ��world’s largest corporations have the potential to lift ecosystem restoration efforts to an unprecedented scale. But their involvement has to be managed with proper evidence and accountability, to make sure the outcomes are beneficial and fair for everyone.

Rachael Garrett

Tim Lamont

Degraded coral reef 'rubblefield' in Indonesia

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution

Companies’ zero-deforestation commitments have potential to halve cattle-driven deforestation in Brazilian Amazon

jg533 — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 23:01:02 +0000

Cattle-rearing is the biggest cause of tropical deforestation in the Amazon - and the world.

A study has found that some of the world’s largest slaughterhouses reduced cattle-driven deforestation in the Amazon by 15% - equivalent to sparing 7,000km2 of forest from clearance (4.5 times the size of London) - through their commitment to zero-deforestation policies between 2010 and 2018.

If these policies were fully implemented and adopted across all cattle companies operating in the Amazon, 24,000km2 of forest (an area larger than Wales) could have been spared over this time, effectively halving cattle-driven deforestation in Brazil.

Deforestation is the second largest contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions after fossil fuel use, and the Brazilian Amazon is the world’s deforestation hotspot.

Zero-deforestation commitments are supply chain policies aiming to ensure production of goods does not involve deforestation, by identifying and dropping suppliers who produce on areas recently cleared of natural vegetation. ̽��ֱ��commitments have been signed by many leading UK beef retailers, including the supermarkets Tesco, Sainsbury’s, and Waitrose.

Although the UK imported 60 million tonnes of Brazilian beef in 2017, according to the National Beef Association the UK is 75% self-sufficient for beef. Many British companies are increasingly turning away from Brazilian beef due to the perceived risk of deforestation. But the researchers argue that this is not the best approach.

“We can benefit the climate by eating less meat in general. But when it comes to deforestation, the solution is not to avoid beef from specific countries – because then we lose our power to make a difference in those places,” said Professor Rachael Garrett, Moran Professor of Conservation and Development at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge Conservation Research Institute, senior author of the report.

She added: “If we do eat imported beef, we should buy it from retailers that are trying to improve cattle production systems in Brazil and elsewhere. If enough countries join the UK and EU in purchasing only deforestation-free beef it’s likely to have a positive impact on the planet by reducing deforestation.”

̽��ֱ��results are published today in the journal Global Environmental Change.

Due to the complexity of Brazilian supply chains and incomplete availability of public records, it has been challenging until now to determine how much of the cattle in any given region was being purchased by companies with zero-deforestation commitments. This impeded efforts to analyse the effectiveness of zero-deforestation policies linked to beef and leather goods - such as shoes and handbags.

̽��ֱ��researchers traced the links between farming regions, slaughterhouses and companies with zero-deforestation commitments in the Brazilian Amazon cattle sector, to see how these links influenced deforestation.

An agreement called G4 is the most widespread and strongly implemented zero-deforestation commitment for cattle in the Brazilian Amazon – accounting for over 99% of cattle exports. ̽��ֱ��study focused on companies that have adopted the G4 Agreement, and found they were associated with substantial reductions in deforestation.

“We’ve shown that zero-deforestation policies are having an important - and measurable – impact in protecting forests, and that with widespread adoption and rigorous implementation they could achieve a lot more,” said Garrett.

She added: “Even reducing deforestation by 15% is a huge amount. But this result shows that supply chain policies have significant limitations, and we need to couple them with more visionary approaches to help countries like Brazil improve their agricultural systems.”

̽��ֱ��researchers say a mix of interventions by the private and public sector is needed to improve cattle-rearing practices and help eliminate deforestation in countries like Brazil.

Public sector interventions could include support for alternative economic activities, and financial incentives or greater pressure to avoid deforestation from the Brazilian government.

“With this evidence, supermarkets can use their influence to help improve Brazilian cattle production. But more needs to be done to improve the rigour of corporate policies and the market coverage of policy adopters, even in relatively well-covered regions such as the Brazilian Amazon,” said Dr Sam Levy at ETH Zurich and New York ̽��ֱ��, lead author of the report.

Cattle production for beef and leather is the cause of over 70% of all deforestation in the Amazon – much of which is illegal. Zero-deforestation commitments cover 82% of beef exported from the Brazilian Amazon for trade internationally – but a large amount of beef production destined for Brazil’s domestic markets is not covered.

Deforestation causes the loss of diverse animal and plant life, threatens the livelihoods of indigenous groups, and increases inequality and conflict.

In 2021, the COP26 Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use committed to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030. It was signed by over 100 countries, representing 85% of global forests.

̽��ֱ��research was funded by the National Science Foundation, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, and the European Research Council.

Reference

Levy, S A et al: ‘Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon could be halved by scaling up implementation of zero-deforestation cattle commitments.’ Global Environmental Change, April 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102671

Study shows better adoption and implementation of company supply chain policies for Brazilian beef and leather could significantly reduce carbon emissions

If we do eat imported beef, we should buy it from retailers that are trying to improve cattle production systems in Brazil and elsewhere.

Rachael Garrett

Bruno Kelly / Greenpeace

Cattle in the Amazon

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommerical

Companies’ ‘deforestation-free’ supply chain pledges have barely impacted forest clearance in the Amazon

jg533 — Fri, 28 Oct 2022 08:13:38 +0000

Corporate pledges not to buy soybeans produced on land deforested after 2006 have reduced tree clearance in the Brazilian Amazon by just 1.6% between 2006 and 2015.

This equates to a protected area of 2,300 km2 in the Amazon rainforest: barely the size of Oxfordshire.

̽��ֱ��findings, made by tracing traders’ soy supplies back to their source, are published today in the journal Environmental Research Letters. ̽��ֱ��work involved a team from the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, Boston ̽��ֱ��, ETH Zurich and New York ̽��ֱ��.

̽��ֱ��researchers also discovered that in the Cerrado, Brazil’s tropical savannah, zero-deforestation commitments have not been adopted effectively - leaving over 50% of soy-suitable forests and their biodiversity without protection.

Brazil has the largest remaining tropical forests on the planet, but these are being rapidly cleared to rear cattle and grow crops including soybean. Demand for soy is surging around the world, and an estimated 4,800 km2 of rainforest is cleared each year to grow soybeans.

̽��ֱ��majority of soy is consumed indirectly by humans: soybean is widely used as feed for factory-farmed chickens, pigs, fish and cattle. It also accounts for around 27% of global vegetable oil production, and as a complete protein source it often forms a key part of vegetarian and vegan diets.

By 2021, at least 94 companies had adopted zero-deforestation commitments – pledging to eliminate deforestation from their supply chains. But the study revealed that many of these commitments are not put into practice.

And the researchers say that adoption of zero-deforestation commitments is lagging among small and medium sized food companies.

“Zero-deforestation pledges are a great first step, but they need to be implemented to have an effect on forests – and right now it’s mainly the bigger companies that have the resources to do this,” said Professor Rachael Garrett, Moran Professor of Conservation and Development at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge Conservation Research Institute, a joint senior author of the report.

She added: “If soybean traders actually implemented their global commitments for zero-deforestation production, current levels of forest clearance in Brazil could be reduced by around 40 percent.”

Deforestation is the second largest contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions after fossil fuel use. It also causes the loss of diverse animal and plant life, threatens the livelihoods of indigenous groups, and increases inequality and conflict.

̽��ֱ��researchers say that the supply chains of other food products including cattle, oil palm and cocoa supply chains are more complex than soy, making them even more difficult to monitor.

“If supply chain policies intend to contribute to the task of tackling deforestation in Brazil, it’s crucial to expand zero-deforestation supply chain policies beyond soy,” said Garrett, who is also Professor of Environmental Policy at ETH Zurich.

A ‘soy moratorium’ was the first voluntary zero-deforestation commitment in the tropics – by signing it, companies agreed not to buy soybeans produced on land deforested after 2006. But while the commitment was implemented in the Brazilian Amazon, most Brazilian soy is produced in the Cerrado – which is rich in biodiversity.

̽��ֱ��researchers say their findings suggest private sector efforts are not enough to halt deforestation: supportive political leadership is also vital to conservation efforts.

“Supply chain governance should not be a substitute for state-led forest policies, which are critical to enable zero deforestation monitoring and enforcement, have better potential to cover different crops, land users, and regions,” said Garrett.

In 2021, the COP26 Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use committed to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030. It was signed by over 100 countries, representing 85% of global forests.

This research was funded by the US National Science Foundation, NASA Land-Cover and Land-Use Change Program, and US Department of Agriculture's National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

Reference

Gollnow, F, Cammelli F, Carlson, KM, and Garrett, RD. ‘Gaps in Adoption and Implementation Limit the Current and Potential Effectiveness of Zero-Deforestation Supply Chain Policies for Soy.’ October 2022, Environmental Research Letters. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ac97f6

READ MORE in Garrett's piece for ̽��ֱ��Conversation: Zero deforestation in the Amazon is now possible - here's what needs to happen

More companies must make and implement zero-deforestation supply chain commitments in order to significantly reduce deforestation and protect diverse ecosystems, say researchers.

Zero-deforestation pledges are a great first step, but they need to be implemented to have an effect on forests.

Rachael Garrett

An area of the Amazon rainforest cleared for soya production

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommerical