The decision by member companies of ABIOVE (the Brazilian Association of Vegetable Oil Industries) to quit the soy moratorium, which bans signatories from purchasing soy grown on deforested Amazon land, is a ‘serious and unjustifiable setback for the private sector and for Brazil‘, WWF Brasil has said.
On Monday, ABIOVE informed authorities that both it and its members were leaving the moratorium, citing recent changes to tax legislation, according to reports.
Major traders including ADM, Bunge, Cargill, Cofco and Louis Dreyfus are among the members of ABIOVE.
‘Deliberately hollowed out’
As WWF Brasil noted, the decision by these companies to step away from the moratorium ‘weakens one of the most effective instruments to combat deforestation in the country and exposes agribusiness itself to growing risks by compromising the integrity of forests on which climate stability and rainfall regimes essential to agricultural production depend’.
It added that while the soy moratorium is still in place, these actions have seen it ‘deliberately hollowed out’, with ABIOVE members choosing to distance themselves from an internationally-recognised benchmark.
Effect of soy moratorium
The soy moratorium has been in place since 2006, and according to WWF Brasil, since 2008, just 2.1% of deforestation in monitored Amazon municipalities has been associated with soy cultivation, while more than 13,000 square kilometres of forest have been preserved. Between 2009 and 2022, deforestation in these municipalities fell by 69%.
‘The conservation of the Amazon must occupy a central place in the strategy of any sector that aims to align with sustainable development and the country’s long-term competitiveness,’ WWF Brasil added.
‘By distancing themselves from the soy moratorium, these companies project to Brazil and the international community a clear message of institutional and environmental rollback, starkly misaligned with growing global market demands for verifiable zero-deforestation commitments and with the need for the country to reaffirm climate ambition, regulatory coherence, and environmental leadership.’ Read more here.
