Why the US–China trade war spells disaster for the Amazon
Richard Fuchs,Peter Alexander,Calum Brown,Frances Cossar,Roslyn C. Henry,Mark Rounsevell
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00896-2
IF: 64.8
2019-03-01
Nature
Abstract:Last year, the United States introduced tariffs of up to 25% on Chinese imported goods worth US$250 billion. In retaliation, the Chinese government imposed tariffs of 25% on $110-billion worth of US goods — including soya beans, a crop mainly used for animal feed. As a result, exports of US soya beans to China dropped by 50% in 2018, even though the trade war began only midway through the year. We forecast that a surge of tropical deforestation could occur as a result of the fresh demand being placed on China's other major suppliers to provide up to 37.6 million tonnes of the crop (that is how much China imported from the United States in 2016). Already, two decades of growth in the global market for soya has led to large-scale deforestation in the Amazon rainforest<sup><a href="#ref-CR1">1</a></sup>. As of 2016, Brazil supplied almost half of China's soya-bean imports, and it has the infrastructure and land area to rapidly increase production. We estimate that the area dedicated to soya-bean production in Brazil could increase by up to 39%, to 13 million hectares, extrapolating from the most recent (2016) data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). For comparison, almost 3 million hectares of rainforest were cleared in 1995 and in 2004, the country's two peak deforestation years (see <a href="http://go.nature.com/2xtkkrd">go.nature.com/2xtkkrd</a>). We urge the United States and China to adjust their trading arrangements immediately to avoid this catastrophe. We also lay out some of the broader changes needed — globally and within nations — to shield tropical forests from shifting trade patterns.China depends heavily on soya-bean imports from three trading partners. Brazil is the largest, followed by the United States and Argentina<sup><a href="#ref-CR2">2</a></sup>. Ninety-four other countries, including China itself, together produce little more soya than Brazil alone (see 'Soya swings', panel B; and Supplementary Information).To cope with the current shortfall in US exports, China could reduce its use of soya bean. This seems unlikely given the nation's growing demand for meat. Just a 2% reduction in soya as animal feed would result in the country producing 10 million tonnes less meat each year<sup><a href="#ref-CR3">3</a></sup>. China could increase its own production of soya beans. But it would have to triple it to make up the shortfall. That would require around 13 million hectares of land — an area the size of Greece. This also seems unlikely given the limited fertile land now available for crops. Some reconfiguration of trade flows might absorb some of the shortfall, as could efforts to substitute other crops into animal feed, such as rapeseed and maize (corn). Last year, Argentina and the European Union started buying soya from the United States for livestock feed and biofuel<sup><a href="#ref-CR4">4</a></sup>. This could make soya beans produced by Argentina, or rapeseed produced by the European Union, available for export to China. But it is unclear whether China will engage in trade deals that would ultimately benefit the United States. Also, globally, soya is the preferred choice for animal feed: it contains both protein and fat, and the crop fixes nitrogen, reducing the need for fertilizer (see 'Uses of Brazilian soya'). Lastly, the contributions made by small producers are tiny compared with what's needed — even accounting for possible increases in production. Russia's plan to boost its production by 20% over the next few years<sup><a href="#ref-CR3">3</a></sup>, for instance, would result in future exports of only 0.7 million tonnes. In our view, the most likely scenario is that Brazil will ramp up its production substantially, and a few other major producers will supply whatever else is needed. Political, legal and trade-system interventions that have prevented the expansion of soya-bean production in the Amazon<sup><a href="#ref-CR5">5</a></sup> are now being weakened<sup><a href="#ref-CR1">1</a></sup>. For instance, Brazil's newly elected president, Jair Bolsonaro, limited the land rights of Indigenous people this January (see <a href="http://go.nature.com/2y9rjvn">go.nature.com/2y9rjvn</a>). Indeed, deforestation increased by 29% between 2015 and 2016 (see <a href="http://go.nature.com/2xtkkrd">go.nature.com/2xtkkrd</a>), and jumped by 50% between August and October 2018, during the Brazilian presidential election campaign (see <a href="http://go.nature.com/2uyrjpt">go.nature.com/2uyrjpt</a>). Also, trade wars have resulted in hikes in soya-bean production in Brazil in the past. Following a 1980 US embargo on soya-bean exports to the Soviet Union, the amount of land devoted to its production in Brazil more than doubled between 1990 and 2010, to 24.2 million hectares. This pushed cattle farming from the southern Cerrado savannah into the Amazon, and caused nearly one-quarter of the total annual <p>-Abstract Truncated-</p>
multidisciplinary sciences