The Australian Conservation Foundation has called on the big supermarkets, fast food chains and banks to adopt a credible definition of ‘deforestation’ that align with international frameworks – then get it out of their supply chains and off their loan books.
“Deforestation is the removal of a natural forest,” said ACF business and biodiversity lead Nathaniel Pelle.
“All credible frameworks, like the Accountability Framework and Science-based Targets, agree that it is deforestation, regardless of whether the removal of the forest was legal or whether or not it is on agricultural properties.
“Natural forests include primary or remnant forests and regrowing forests and woodlands that have been subject to major human impacts in the past.
“In Australia, a forest that is at least 15 years old is likely to have regained much of the structure, composition and functions of a natural forest and is often a haven for biodiversity.
“Most deforestation in Australia destroys forest that are .
“Forests on agricultural properties are still forests. In fact, farmers look after some of the most biodiversity-rich forests on the continent. Bulldozing those forests is deforestation.
“Most graziers are not engaged in broadscale bulldozing of bushland, but it’s very difficult for consumers to choose deforestation-free beef from those responsible farmers, or for export markets to have certainty they are not importing deforestation, because of poor traceability and transparency.
“Most of the beef industry is already deforestation free by the internationally accepted definition, what’s missing is market recognition of those credentials.
“Cattle Australia’s proposed definition doesn’t align with international frameworks and would leave the industry, or any business that adopts it, open to charges of greenwashing or having their targets ruled invalid.
“What would create certainty for beef producers is a definition that is globally accepted, not an Australia-only version.
“Australia has a deforestation problem, but it’s being driven by .
“Cattle Australia’s proposed definition creates a financial risk for the whole industry.
“Our food systems . Not acting to end deforestation has consequences for farmers, shareholders, nature and ultimately our food security.”
ACF, Greenpeace and the Wilderness Society published this year on what is needed for Australian corporate deforestation and conversion pledges to align with global frameworks.
More than 250 Australian .
ACF that it will stop selling beef linked to deforestation, in accordance with the Science-based Targets Initiative, but the supermarket giant hasn’t yet set out its deforestation definition.
‘deforestation is a contributor to climate change and biodiversity loss,’ but has not yet made a commitment to end nature destruction linked to its supply chains.
goes further than Woolworths by promising to rule out the destruction of all ecosystems including native bushland, not only forests, in other words a ‘zero conversion’ commitment.
