It has become clear in the last few years that saving the forests is crucial to meeting our climate targets, and is one of the most cost-effective interventions. Policy and advocacy work is a core part of halting deforestation.

Companies are also realizing that they must play a role, and there is rapidly increasing interest from leading companies like Microsoft, Stripe, JetBlue, and Starbucks in going carbon neutral. Forest offsets are risky (e.g., buying offsets may not actually lead to reductions in emissions due to project failure, wildfires, etc) - when projects fail, buyers will not receive offset credits. In addition, certain companies such as Microsoft have indicated they are not willing to pay for "avoided deforestation" carbon credits.

Nonetheless, many companies looking to achieve their climate goals will be interested in exploring forest carbon offsets as part of their environmental portfolio.

Business ideas

• Create substitute products for commodities that drive deforestation, such as soy, beef, and palm oil: Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat could help drive down demand for beef (though there are concerns about how healthy their products are, and their use of monoculture inputs such as soy). Lab-grown meat companies like Memphis Meats also can reduce demand for cattle from deforested areas.
• Create a new consumer brand that markets sustainable forest products: Work with local forest communities to create a high-value forest product that can be sold into international markets (e.g., nuts, acai, berries, tea, fungicides, aquaculture). At scale, this will increase the economic value of avoiding deforestation. Companies in this category include Guayuki, Runa, and a number of chocolate companies.
• Forest monitoring company: Use freely available satellite data combined with AI to create a low-cost forest monitoring solution to measure above-ground biomass. Sell software product to governments, project developers, and offset buyers participating in carbon markets. Primary opportunity:
  • Can be of value both to carbon buyers (who want to double check that their projects are capturing carbon), and forest governments (who are trying to convince donor agencies that they are sequestering carbon)
  • However, market size of monitoring alone seems limited:
    • The Tropical Forest Standard, and potentially future programs, don't allow monitoring companies to also participate in activities like sale of carbon credits (due to conflicts of interest)
    • Near real-time monitoring for enforcement purposes is already possible, through platforms such as Global Forest Watch, which uses data from Landsat, Sentinel-2 and Planet Labs. The barrier is local-government buy-in, and capacity of local institutions to take action when they see deforestation (e.g., physical intervention, taking legal action against illegal activities)
    • Remote sensing is just one piece that needs to be verified in order to ensure that forest carbon offsets have an impact. It's also necessary to ensure that projects are additional (weren't going to happen anyway), permanent, and do not cause leakage; these metrics will vary from project to project and are less scalable to track
• Tech-enabled forest restoration company: Experts estimate there are 2B hectares of degraded land around the world. Through the Bonn Challenge, countries pledged to restore 350M hectares of forests and croplands by 2030. A forest restoration company could:
  • Conduct scientific studies to determine areas uniquely suited to restoration that could be done at very low cost (e.g., some observers estimate that almost 30% of degraded forestland in Brazil can regenerate naturally, without need for expensive tree planting)
  • Once low-cost and high-impact areas are identified, there are two options:
    • Work as a project developer to create and market carbon projects
    • Work as a technical service provider for project developers or governments. Can either help with 1) restoration strategy, or 2) provide technology (e.g., drones, seeds) to conduct restoration at scale
• Financing and technical consulting for Tropical Forest Standard (TFS) and other forest restoration projects including REDD+: Carbon funds like the Althelia Climate Fund provide upfront financing for forestry projects, in exchange for a share of the upside from future carbon sales. Given the high risks of tropical forestry projects (e.g., unclear rule of law, loss of political support, wildfires, etc.), financings will likely need to be backed up or supported by development institutions
  • For example, Althelia and partners invested $9M for a Peruvian conservation project focused on long-term conservation of 591,000 hectares of forest through agroforestry. The project is expected to generate 4M carbon credits over a seven-year investment period. Note that there is skepticism on how impactful these one-off projects might be, if not nested within a jurisdictional program. WWF and Gold Standard do not support sale of carbon credits on individual avoided deforestation projects
  • If TFS and jurisdictional REDD+ projects take off (note that some major non-profits are skeptical that TFS will actually happen at scale), there could be opportunity to provide to provide financing + technical consulting to local governments; size of projects should theoretically be large. As noted above, would likely need support of development institutions to navigate dealing with forest governments and managing risk

Nonprofit (and corporate CSR) ideas

• Digital marketing agency focused on helping shift local public opinion towards conservation and support for pro-conservation leaders: Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, which had already been on the rise, increased another 30% the first year Bolsonaro took office. Helping change local public opinion to favor conservation may have the biggest impact on deforestation. Brazil has historically been averse to outsiders trying to influence domestic policy (in fact, repelling external "colonialists" including international NGOs has been one of Bolsonaro's key and effective talking points). The best approach here would be to use all of Silicon Valley's cutting edge marketing tools to help amplify the voice of local Brazilian NGOs, activists, and local politicians.
• Some specific policy areas that could be of interest:
  • Advocate for improved land title: More than one-fifth of the land in the Amazon has unclear land title, which has been linked to higher rates of illegal deforestation. Help establish legal framework and enforcement mechanisms for improved land title.
  • Support indigenous groups in establishing land tenure: Indigenous groups know the forests well, and people living on the land tend to protect it. Uncertainty of land tenure has led to significant deforestation, and also violence (135 indigenous people were killed in Brazil in 2018 due to land disputes). Sometimes, all it takes to regenerate a forest is to "support indigenous peoples and local communities to better protect saplings from fires and hungry livestock."
  • Advocate for companies to increase (and government to require) traceability in the beef, soy, and palm oil industries: Technology exists to better track where commodities like beef are coming from, but political will does not exist. Consumers will need to push companies and the government to better monitor commodities and where they are coming from.
• Increase international funding flows for forest protection: Use innovative, digital marketing campaigns to mobilize citizen support and lobby donor governments to provide more international funding for forest protection. Right now, only $1B / year is channeled into forest protection; the 2006 Stern Report suggests a minimum of $10B / year is needed to halt tropical deforestation.
• Increase capabilities on Brazilian Amazon ranches: Brazilian cattle farming is not productive, with one hectare of pasture supporting less than one cow. Increasing productivity on existing pastures could reduce pressure to deforest new areas. Since technical assistance can increase the profitability of existing cattle ranches, this must be combined with very strong government regulations preventing further deforestation.
• Increase awareness and labeling for products from deforested areas: Create a labeling standard to make consumers better aware of where products are coming from and whether deforestation was involved.
• Increase technical assistance for local governments: Many governments lack the monitoring and forestry planning capabilities to participate in results-based forestry schemes (e.g., the Amazon Fund, bilateral arrangements with the Government of Norway, TFS and carbon offset projects). Improving local technical capacity can result in increased incentives for governments to protect the forest.
• Acquire ecologically important land for preservation: Some nonprofits like the Guyra Paraguay and the Nature Conservancy will either acquire land or partner with the government and local indigenous groups to turn land into nature preserves.
  • Requires close coordination with the government, since government protection will be needed to prevent illegal activities, particularly in large and remote jungle areas.
  • This may not have an impact on overall deforestation rates if the underlying economic drivers of deforestation are not addressed. Because acquisition can be so expensive, it is typically used when strategically connecting nature reserves, or preserving areas that have unique ecological importance