European Union

In today's edition: AI Board agenda, Plenary debates of Google fine

In today's edition: Irish renewables push, COP30, Russian gas

Global forests remain in crisis, a new report says. Credit: Dirk Erasmus/Unsplash

By Umar Manzoor Shah
SRINAGAR, Oct 21 2025 (IPS)

The Forest Declaration Assessment 2025 warns that global forest loss remains alarmingly high, with little sign of improvement.

The report, released on October 14, by a coalition of international research groups and civil society organizations, states that nearly 8.1 million hectares of forest were destroyed in 2024 alone, leaving the planet 63 percent off track to meet the zero-deforestation goal pledged under the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration and other global commitments.

The report describes 2025 as a “dangerous midpoint” in the decade of forest pledges. It says, “Global forests remain in crisis. Despite the indispensable role of forests, the verdict is clear: we are off track on halting and reversing deforestation by 2030.” Forests, the report notes, are “non-negotiable infrastructure for a stable planet,” providing livelihoods to more than a billion people and sheltering 80 percent of terrestrial species.

The report says COP 30 is a “pivotal” opportunity to move to concrete action on forests from the mere commitments.

Under Brazil’s leadership, holding the COP presidency, countries are expected to forge stronger links between climate, forests, and biodiversity by expanding commitments across the land sector,” the report states, adding that this includes scaling innovative finance for standing forests, advancing deforestation- and conversion-free supply chains, supporting resilient food systems, and upholding the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

It calls for forest commitments to be embedded in the next round of NDCs so that the Global Stocktake drives tangible national and international progress.

One of the main report authors, Erin Matson, in an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service, said that the reasons behind the failure to reduce deforestation are many and complex, but they include drastically misaligned finance stemming from an economic system that rewards activities that harm forests over conserving standing forests.

“Both public and private finance are misaligned; for example, USD 409 billion on average per year (2021-2023) is spent globally on environmentally harmful agricultural subsidies versus only USD 1.7 billion spent on payments for ecosystem services by agricultural producers. And in 2024, the 150 financial institutions assessed by Forest 500 had USD 8.9 trillion in active financing to companies most exposed to deforestation risk in their supply chains.”

According to Matson, weak governance is characterized by endemic corruption (which allows well-resourced criminal networks and elites to profit from illegal or illicit forest destruction with impunity), inadequate and mistargeted law enforcement (which often targets small-scale actors who engage in illegal or illicit forest clearing but lets the bigger culprits go free), and insecure land tenure rights for Indigenous Peoples and local communities (which severely limits their ability to manage and protect their forest territories).

“Another reason is lack of political will and short-termism. By and large, most leaders in government, business, and finance have, over the last decade, tended to prioritize policies and approaches that deliver short-term wins (like economic growth and increased profits) without tackling the fundamental risks and harms from nature loss that undermine future, medium- and long-term economic and social stability and prosperity,” Matson said.

Rising Losses, Failing Promises

According to the assessment, deforestation rates have barely shifted since 2015, when governments and companies began making strong commitments to forest protection. The 8.1 million hectares lost in 2024 were far above the annual ceiling of 5 million hectares needed to stay on track. Most of this destruction occurred in tropical regions, where 94 percent of all global deforestation took place. The resulting emissions were staggering—4.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents, more than the annual emissions of the European Union.

“Every year the curve isn’t bent, we fall further behind. Deforestation continues at the same rate we saw ten years ago. That’s not a slowdown—it’s stagnation,” reads the report.

The hardest hit were primary tropical forests, which store vast amounts of carbon and support irreplaceable biodiversity. About 6.7 million hectares of primary forest were destroyed in 2024, releasing 3.1 billion metric tons of CO₂—nearly 150 percent of the U.S. energy sector’s annual emissions. The report calls this “an ecological and climatic emergency” and warns that much of this loss is irreversible.

“These forests take centuries to form. Once primary forest is gone, no restoration project can bring it back in a generation. The damage is permanent within our lifetime,” claims the report.

The Amazon Basin remains the epicenter of global forest degradation and fire-related emissions. Fires in the Amazon in 2024 released 791 million metric tons of CO₂, exceeding the total emissions of Germany. Bolivia lost 9 percent of its remaining intact tropical moist forests, while Brazil accounted for half of all degradation in the Amazon Basin.

Agriculture Drives Most Forest Loss

The report identifies permanent agriculture as the leading cause of deforestation, responsible for 86 percent of global forest loss over the past decade. Forests are being cleared for crops, pastureland, and plantation commodities like palm oil, soy, and rubber. Mining, infrastructure expansion, and land speculation add further pressure.

Domestic consumption is a major factor. For instance, in Latin America, the region’s consumption of beef and pasture products is the primary cause of deforestation.

In contrast, deforestation in Asia and Africa is tied to a broader range of export commodities. Recent studies cited in the report show that developed nations, especially the United States and several European countries, drive substantial biodiversity loss abroad through imported goods. Between 2000 and 2015, the 24 most industrialized countries caused an estimated 13 percent of global forest biodiversity loss through international trade.

The assessment also notes that “corruption, weak law enforcement, and poor land tenure systems” contribute significantly to deforestation. These governance failures allow illegal land grabs and unregulated clearing, undermining conservation efforts.

According to Matson,  commodity-driven deforestation is complex because it is caused by several factors, including patterns of commodity demand, both for domestic consumption and international trade; trade regulations and tariffs that can shift commodity production areas and flows; domestic land use dynamics like land speculation, where the value of land is considered to increase once forest has been cleared; and weak law enforcement (69-94% of tropical deforestation is estimated to be illegal).

“To change this pattern, we need multiple actions that would complement each other. An investment in just, equitable, and responsive law enforcement to tackle illegal deforestation and make it unprofitable to clear land illegally. Trade regulations that disallow the import of commodities produced on land deforested after a certain date (like 2020), combined with investments in traceability systems and due diligence regulations to ensure that these regulations can be enforced,” she said.

Matson pitched for the adoption and enforcement of due diligence regulations to address deforestation related to domestic consumption of commodities.

“We need efforts and campaigns that aim to shift consumption patterns, where culturally appropriate, for example, reducing meat consumption in high-income, high-consuming countries, shifting to plant-based proteins, and shifting to consumption of certified deforestation-free commodities.”

Fires and Degradation Multiply the Threat

While deforestation removes entire forests, degradation weakens those that remain. In 2024, about 8.8 million hectares of tropical moist forests were degraded, twice the level compatible with halting degradation by 2030. The report calls degradation an “invisible crisis,” often overlooked in policy debates but just as damaging to biodiversity and climate stability.

Fire-induced degradation, particularly in the Amazon, was the primary driver of these losses. Extreme droughts, poor forest management, and deliberate burning for land clearing have made fires more destructive.

As per the report, the Amazon burned on a scale we haven’t seen in decades. These fires are no longer isolated events—they are symptoms of a stressed ecosystem pushed beyond its limits.

The report warns that degraded forests are far more likely to be deforested later, creating a cycle of decline. Data from Latin America, Africa, and Asia shows that once canopy cover falls below 50 percent, the risk of full deforestation rises sharply.

Degradation is a red flag. The report says that when forests start losing structure, deforestation often follows.

Monitoring degradation remains a major challenge due to limited global data. Most national reporting focuses only on tree cover loss, not on forest health or ecosystem function. The report urges governments to integrate degradation indicators into climate and biodiversity frameworks.

“We consider forest degradation a ‘silent crisis’ because forest degradation is extremely widespread and damaging to forest health and resilience, but it often goes unnoticed because it’s harder to detect and track than deforestation. Unlike deforestation, there is no globally agreed definition or standardized monitoring approach for forest degradation. Countries reporting to the FAO’s Forest Resources Assessment can set their own national definitions under the FRA 2025 guidance. This makes it difficult to compare data across regions or to capture the cumulative impacts of logging, fires, and other disturbances on forest quality,” Matson said.

She added that other frameworks have encouraged countries to set forest degradation definitions and monitoring criteria, such as REDD+—so the countries where degradation monitoring is most advanced are the ones that have advanced REDD+ programs.

“Where there are incentives to accurately monitor and report degradation, systems do improve. Forest degradation contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions and also impacts biodiversity, so countries should set relevant targets, as a first step, within their NDCs (nationally determined contributions) and in their NBSAPs (national biodiversity strategies and action plans),” Matson said.

Restoration Efforts Show Potential, But Lag Behind

Despite grim trends, the assessment highlights some positive developments. As of September 2025, restoration projects were active across 10.6 million hectares of deforested and degraded land. These efforts include reforestation, agroforestry, and natural regeneration programs, mostly in tropical regions.

However, the figure represents only 0.3 percent of the global forest restoration potential, far below the 30 percent target set under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Monitoring continues to be another area of weakness. Much of the available data comes from fragmented or overlapping sources, such as the Restor database and national observatories. The report warns that without unified global tracking, restoration progress will remain poorly understood.

The assessment calls for broader monitoring under the UN’s Framework for Ecosystem Restoration Monitoring (FERM), which combines quantitative data with qualitative information on project effectiveness and local participation. Governance and Finance Gaps Persist.

The report stresses that progress depends on systemic shifts, not isolated successes. While countries like Brazil have reduced deforestation through strong enforcement and inclusive land-use planning, others have seen gains erased by political change or weak implementation.

Financing for forest protection and restoration remains grossly inadequate. The report finds that forest-positive finance is still a fraction of the funds supporting activities that harm forests, such as fossil fuel subsidies and industrial agriculture. It calls for reforming financial systems to redirect capital toward sustainable land use.

The assessment also highlights that Indigenous and local communities remain underrepresented in forest decision-making, despite managing some of the world’s most intact ecosystems. Expanding legal recognition of land rights and ensuring community participation are described as “non-negotiable conditions” for progress.

“Like most topics covered in the report, barriers to scaled-up restoration are complex and are mainly financial, governance-related, and structural. Restoration is often underfunded because returns are only realized over the long term, and ecological benefits—like carbon storage, water regulation, or biodiversity—are not fully valued in markets. Public funding for restoration tends to be short-term or project-based, while private finance shies away due to high perceived risks, unclear revenue models, or a simple lack of investable projects or initiatives,” said Matson.

She says that on the policy side, many countries lack clear land tenure, long-term incentives, and enabling frameworks for restoration at scale.

“Integrating restoration into national climate, biodiversity, and rural development plans—and aligning finance, tenure, and monitoring systems accordingly—would incentivize and corral collective action to develop overarching, landscape-scale restoration approaches that move beyond scattered, individual projects,” Matson said.

Deforestation and Market Dynamics

With only five years left before the 2030 deadline, the report states that incremental changes will not be enough. “This crisis cannot fade into the background noise,” it states. “Isolated successes will not save the world’s forests. We need structural reform that makes forest protection the rule, not the exception.”

Experts say that reversing current trends will require coordinated action across agriculture, trade, and finance. Governments must close legal loopholes that allow deforestation-linked products to enter markets. Companies must trace and disclose their supply chains. And international lenders must align funding with environmental goals.

“In the medium to long term, we need to make preserving and sustainably managing forests more attractive and more profitable than even legal deforestation. And that requires shifting the financial incentives—subsidy reform; establishing payments for keeping standing forests standing, like the Tropical Forests Forever Facility; and increasing payments for ecosystem services programs for farmers and foresters,” Matson said. “A lot of deforestation is highly responsive to market dynamics—when the price of gold goes up, we see much more deforestation for gold mining. So, counterbalancing those harmful financial incentives with positive ones must be a part of any permanent solution to the deforestation crisis.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• 146 Land and Environmental Defenders Killed or Disappeared in 2024
• ‘Tell Us When the Next Storm Will Come’—Human Stories From Kashmir’s Deadliest August
• Intensified Legal, Political, and Grassroots Battles Over Amazon Oil Expansion

Excerpt:

Closing legal loopholes that allow deforestation-linked products to enter markets and getting international lenders to align funding with environmental goals are key to ending deforestation, says Erin Matson, one of the lead authors of the Forest Declaration Assessment 2025.

This video captures highlights from the reception in Brussels to celebrate the 76th Anniversary of the Founding of the People’s Republic of China. Policymakers, academics, and cultural figures share their perspectives on strengthening dialogue and cooperation between the EU and China. Speakers reflect on: The importance of maintaining open dialogue and mutual understanding Opportunities for […]

Co-Chairs Conclusions on Strengthening Cross-Regional Security and Connectivity by the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, Kaja Kallas, Commissioner for Enlargement, Marta Kos, and Commissioner for International Partnerships, Jozef Síkela.

In today's edition: This week's agenda

Plus Indra wants to join a European project, and no we don't mean FCAS

Industry alliance statement comes ahead of a key leaders’ summit aimed at changing EU climate rules

A White House staffer’s video hailing Meloni as defiant toward the EU has reignited tensions over Italy’s transatlantic loyalties

Bratislava holds out on Russian gas ban, but Prague says the alternatives are ready

Tuesday 21 October

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

Tuesday 21 October

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

In today’s edition: Europe’s dependence on the US grows as Trump shapes foreign policy from afar, Bulgaria opens its skies for Putin ahead of the Budapest summit, and the Commission begins quietly dismantling the Green Deal under political pressure

Higher income and fintech expansion boosted credit growth, even as monetary policy remained effective. Credit: IMF

By Swarnali A. Hannan, Daniel Leigh, and Rui Xu
WASHINGTON DC, Oct 21 2025 (IPS)

At 15 percent, Brazil’s monetary policy interest rate (called Selic) is one of the highest among major economies. Yet in 2024, bank credit grew by 11.5 percent and corporate bond issuance rose by 30 percent.

This credit expansion—in the face of high policy rates—benefited many individuals, households, and companies. But it also raised questions about the effectiveness of monetary policy itself. In other words, why did the central bank’s efforts to cool down the economy, by making financing more expensive, seem not to be working?

Our analysis, in the context of Brazil’s latest yearly economic review (the Article IV consultation), shows that concerns have been largely unwarranted and that monetary policy transmission in Brazil remains effective. Indeed, recent data indicates that credit growth is starting to slow down.

So, what exactly has been happening?

Even as monetary policy was doing its job as intended, we saw two other factors playing a critical role: strong income growth and the country’s success in expanding financial inclusion. These factors boosted the demand for credit and its supply.

A committed central bank

Brazil’s was the first major central bank to hike rates during the pandemic. After a period of easing, it started a new tightening cycle in September 2024. These decisions have been appropriate and guided by the need to bring inflation and inflation expectations down to its 3 percent target.

The country’s twelve-month inflation rate reached 5.1 percent in August, down slightly from the previous month, but still well above target this year. Inflation expectations are also projected to stay above target over an eighteen-month horizon. This explains the rise in policy rates since the pandemic, in line with standard inflation-targeting principles.

How effective is monetary policy transmission?

To gauge the effectiveness of Brazil’s monetary policy tightening, our report estimates how changes in the central bank’s policy interest rate pass through to bank lending rates paid by households and businesses.

We find that a 1 percentage point increase in the policy rate raises lending rates by around 0.7 percentage point after four months. To raise average lending rates in the economy by one percentage point, the monetary policy rate must increase by about 1.4 percentage points, since roughly 40 percent of total credit is comprised of government-directed loans that are less responsive to policy rate changes.

The analysis also suggests that since 2020, corporate lending rates have become more responsive to changes in the basic rate. This may in part result from the 2018 reform of Brazil’s large development bank, BNDES, which aligned its lending rates with long-term market rates.

Bank-level analysis shows corporate loans adjust faster than consumer loans, likely due to tighter margins and more experienced borrowers. In turn, payroll-backed consumer loans are the least responsive because of rate caps.

What drove credit growth

Although Brazil’s monetary policy is working, credit growth has been strong over the past few years. This was due to both cyclical factors and structural changes. On the cyclical side, Brazil’s economy has grown faster than expected, with low unemployment and rising incomes driving higher credit demand.

Moreover, Brazil has been making significant structural changes that have increased financial inclusion and credit availability.

The rapid expansion of fintech lenders gave more people access to credit. In 2024, digital banks and other fintech lenders accounted for a quarter of the credit card market and over 10 percent of non-payroll personal loans.

Increased competition reduced banking-sector concentration and lowered average lending rates of incumbent banks. In addition, bond-market financing for corporates as a share of GDP tripled in the last decade, driven by tax-exempt debentures. All these factors supported credit growth.

With a 15 percent basic rate, Brazil’s central bank has administered a strong dose of monetary tightening to temper credit growth and return inflation and expectations to target. New loan volumes have been falling since April, further suggesting that the treatment is working.

More broadly, Brazil’s economy is showing signs of moderation amid tight monetary and fiscal policies and elevated global policy uncertainty. Overall, our research shows that concerns about the lack of effectiveness of monetary are proving to be largely unwarranted and that monetary policy transmission in Brazil remains active.

Daniel Leigh is IMF mission chief for Brazil; Swarnali A. Hannan is a deputy division chief in the IMF’s Western Hemisphere Department; and Rui Xu is an economist in the Monetary and Capital Markets Department

IPS UN Bureau

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');  

The EU Deforestation Regulation has suffered multiple setbacks due to its complex and occasionally vague legal architecture, leading to regulatory uncertainty and inconsistent interpretations across Member States. For the EUDR to go ahead successfully, some critical issues require immediate attention.

“He should bring a sleep mask and earplugs. The shouting can go on until four in the morning", a former inmate warned

To outsiders, it may seem strange that Norwegians – prosperous, peaceful and geographically distant from the conflict – so often take positions that provoke their allies

Trump’s deals with Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Merck expose risk to EU

‘Everybody has a responsibility to make this project succeed,’ says Indra’s CEO

Nuclear fusion research hasn't yielded a breakthrough moment but that could now change, just in time for the new EU fusion strategy