Key messages
1. Coverage has increased but it remains unevenly distributed
The plot below shows the volumes of soy traded under a zero-deforestation commitment in the Amazon, Cerrado and rest of Brazil between 2005 and 2017.
Experimenting here with a map to display change in coverage at the municipal level (regardless of commitment type). It appears that very little has changed in some of the key hotspots of MATOPIBA. Potential avenue to explore in terms of deforestation rate vs commtiment adoption rate? Are traders adopting because of where they are or simply due to external pressures? The case of Louis Dreyfus would suggest the latter.
Here is a plot of the proportion of cerrado soy deforestation that is in Matopiba. I think it could used in a multiplot with the ZDC coverage and a map looking at ZDC coverage in Matopiba specifically.
2. Committed actors are differently exposed to deforestation risks
To-do