dashboard.forestdeclaration.org

Iceland

Although most tropical primary forest loss occurs in just a handful of tropical forested countries, much of this loss is driven by the production of agricultural commodities for international trade, including beef, soy, palm oil, and cocoa; and products made with these commodities such as leather and chocolate. Demand from wealthier countries, in particular, drives much of this unsustainable production. In 2017, for example, almost 1.3 million hectares (Mha) of deforestation were embodied in internationally traded commodities. The countries with the highest levels of imported deforestation that year were China, India, and the United States, responsible for importing a collective 0.49 Mha of embodied deforestation. 

Although most tropical primary forest loss occurs in just a handful of tropical forested countries, much of this loss is driven by the production of agricultural commodities for international trade, including beef, soy, palm oil, and cocoa; and products made with these commodities such as leather and chocolate. Demand from wealthier countries, in particular, drives much of this unsustainable production. In 2017, for example, almost 1.3 million hectares (Mha) of deforestation were embodied in internationally traded commodities. The countries with the highest levels of imported deforestation that year were China, India, and the United States, responsible for importing a collective 0.49 Mha of embodied deforestation. 

Policies and programs to make agricultural production more sustainable must be paired with broader interventions to alleviate hunger and food insecurity, working towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 2.1 to ensure all people have access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food all year round by 2030. Unfortunately, since the development of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, the prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity has been moving in the wrong direction. As of 2022, 2.4 billion people (30% of the global population) were moderately or severely food insecure. This number has remained steady since 2020, after increasing significantly between 2019 and 2020 at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.  

Policies and programs to make agricultural production more sustainable must be paired with broader interventions to alleviate hunger and food insecurity, working towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 2.1 to ensure all people have access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food all year round by 2030. Unfortunately, since the development of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, the prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity has been moving in the wrong direction. As of 2022, 2.4 billion people (30% of the global population) were moderately or severely food insecure. This number has remained steady since 2020, after increasing significantly between 2019 and 2020 at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.  

<span class=”NormalTextRun SCXW253531080 BCX4″ data-ccp-charstyle=”ui-provider” data-ccp-charstyle-defn=”{“ObjectId”:”efa17122-9a5f-4259-a59b-40984941f234

<span class=”NormalTextRun SCXW253531080 BCX4″ data-ccp-charstyle=”ui-provider” data-ccp-charstyle-defn=”{“ObjectId”:”efa17122-9a5f-4259-a59b-40984941f234

Herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides are used globally to enhance crop yields and promote food security. Despite their utility, pesticides also pose risks to human health (especially to farmworkers and surrounding communities) and the environment (e.g., biodiversity loss, air and water pollution). The quantities of pesticides used per area of cropland can be used as a proxy to monitor potential overuse of pesticides. This indicator assumes that the more pesticides are used, the greater is the risk of adverse outcomes for human health and the environment. However, the indicator is unable to account for how the risk of pesticide overuse differs across the world, dependent on regional conditions (including biodiversity levels and water scarcity), the compartment of the environment that is affected (e.g., air, soil, water), and the type of pesticide considered. Globally, pesticide use per area of cropland has been increasing rather than decreasing, rising 27% from 2000 to 2021. 

Herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides are used globally to enhance crop yields and promote food security. Despite their utility, pesticides also pose risks to human health (especially to farmworkers and surrounding communities) and the environment (e.g., biodiversity loss, air and water pollution). The quantities of pesticides used per area of cropland can be used as a proxy to monitor potential overuse of pesticides. This indicator assumes that the more pesticides are used, the greater is the risk of adverse outcomes for human health and the environment. However, the indicator is unable to account for how the risk of pesticide overuse differs across the world, dependent on regional conditions (including biodiversity levels and water scarcity), the compartment of the environment that is affected (e.g., air, soil, water), and the type of pesticide considered. Globally, pesticide use per area of cropland has been increasing rather than decreasing, rising 27% from 2000 to 2021. 

Water scarcity can reduce crop yields, undermining efforts to promote food security. Water stress is defined as the degree to which water resources (rivers, lakes, aquifers) are being exploited to meet countries’ water demand for agriculture, reflected as the total freshwater withdrawn by agriculture as a proportion of available freshwater resources. This indicator tracks progress of withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water scarcity. The indicator complements water use efficiency by focusing more on water sources and the environment (and thus subsequent effects on biodiversity) than the use itself. While reduced water stress values are generally considered positive, in a few cases, extremely low values may be detrimental as they may indicate the inability of a country to properly use its water resources. In these cases, a moderate increase would be a positive sign instead. Globally, water stress has remained consistent at 13% from 2015 (the earliest year available) to 2020. 

Water scarcity can reduce crop yields, undermining efforts to promote food security. Water stress is defined as the degree to which water resources (rivers, lakes, aquifers) are being exploited to meet countries’ water demand for agriculture, reflected as the total freshwater withdrawn by agriculture as a proportion of available freshwater resources. This indicator tracks progress of withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water scarcity. The indicator complements water use efficiency by focusing more on water sources and the environment (and thus subsequent effects on biodiversity) than the use itself. While reduced water stress values are generally considered positive, in a few cases, extremely low values may be detrimental as they may indicate the inability of a country to properly use its water resources. In these cases, a moderate increase would be a positive sign instead. Globally, water stress has remained consistent at 13% from 2015 (the earliest year available) to 2020. 

Agrobiodiversity is a key component of more sustainable agriculture. It can enhance the resilience and adaptability of farming systems to climate change by improving carbon sequestration in soil and biomass, as well as improving genetic diversity for breeding crops and livestock that are more resilient to climate change and other stressors. The Agrobiodiversity Index (ABDI) is a set of 22 indicators developed to monitor the most essential aspects of agrobiodiversity as it relates to food system sustainability – specifically across three key pillars: consumption, production, and genetic resource conservation. The indicators are sorted into three measurement categories: 1) action: indicators that monitor interventions to enhance biodiversity levels, 2) commitment: indicators that measure levels of support for improving biodiversity levels, and 3) status: indicators that evaluate the level of biodiversity in a country. The ABDI scores range from 0 (least desirable) to 100 (most desirable). The Agrobiodiversity Index can be used to assess the diversity of crops and livestock. It is a useful tool for monitoring the state of agrobiodiversity in different countries and regions.  
The 2021 Agrobiodiversity Index report, which evaluates the ABDI scores for 80 countries, found the mean agrobiodiversity status score to be 56 out of 100. Agrobiodiversity Index scores in consumption and conservation are 14–82% higher in developed countries than those of low-income countries. A comparison of the Agrobiodiversity Index scores of 80 countries revealed just 12 countries with high scores (60-80 scores) for agrobiodiversity status and action. 

Agrobiodiversity is a key component of more sustainable agriculture. It can enhance the resilience and adaptability of farming systems to climate change by improving carbon sequestration in soil and biomass, as well as improving genetic diversity for breeding crops and livestock that are more resilient to climate change and other stressors. The Agrobiodiversity Index (ABDI) is a set of 22 indicators developed to monitor the most essential aspects of agrobiodiversity as it relates to food system sustainability – specifically across three key pillars: consumption, production, and genetic resource conservation. The indicators are sorted into three measurement categories: 1) action: indicators that monitor interventions to enhance biodiversity levels, 2) commitment: indicators that measure levels of support for improving biodiversity levels, and 3) status: indicators that evaluate the level of biodiversity in a country. The ABDI scores range from 0 (least desirable) to 100 (most desirable). The Agrobiodiversity Index can be used to assess the diversity of crops and livestock. It is a useful tool for monitoring the state of agrobiodiversity in different countries and regions.  
The 2021 Agrobiodiversity Index report, which evaluates the ABDI scores for 80 countries, found the mean agrobiodiversity status score to be 56 out of 100. Agrobiodiversity Index scores in consumption and conservation are 14–82% higher in developed countries than those of low-income countries. A comparison of the Agrobiodiversity Index scores of 80 countries revealed just 12 countries with high scores (60-80 scores) for agrobiodiversity status and action.