Cited by 214Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementOil Palm Production and SustainabilityEnvironmental Conservation and Management

Brazil’s Amazon Soy Moratorium reduced deforestation

Heilmayr, Robert, Rausch, Lisa L., Munger, Jacob, Gibbs, Holly K.·2020·Nature Food

Abstract

Between 2004 and 2012, multiple policies contributed to one of the great conservation successes of the twenty-first century-an 84% decrease in the rate of Brazilian Amazon deforestation. Among the most prominent of these policies is the Amazon Soy Moratorium (ASM), an agreement by grain traders not to purchase soy grown on recently deforested land. The ASM inspired widespread adoption of similar zero-deforestation commitments, but its impact is poorly understood due to its overlap with other conservation policies. Here, we apply an econometric triple-differences model to remotely sensed deforestation data to isolate the ASM's impact within Brazil's Arc of Deforestation. We show that the ASM reduced deforestation in soy-suitable locations in the Amazon by 0.66 ± 0.32 percentage points relative to a counterfactual control, preventing 18,000 ± 9,000 km 2 of deforestation over its first decade (2006-2016). Although these results highlight potential benefits of private conservation policies, the ASM's success was dependent on complementarities with public property registries and deforestation monitoring.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s43016-020-00194-5

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The identification strategy explores a regulatory discontinuity at the Amazon biome border.

    “Our identification strategy explores a regulatory discontinuity at the Amazon biome border, which has been used previously by different authors to estimate deforestation reduction impacts of various conservation policies 55,58,59 .”
  • Heilmayr et al. show that the Amazon Soy Moratorium reduced deforestation by 35%.

    “Heilmayr et al. 58 show that the Amazon Soy Moratorium reduced deforestation by 35%, while Assunção et al. 55 estimate that Central Bank rural credit restrictions reduced deforestation by 60%.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Heilmayr, R., Rausch, L. L., Munger, J., & Gibbs, H. K.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Heilmayr, Robert
Venue
Nature Food
Published
2020-12-11
Volume
1
Issue
12
Pages
801-810
ISSN
2662-1355 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3111669096
Cited by
214
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 27 · 2013: 1
FWCI
9.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Food (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Oil Palm Production and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Conservation and Management
Keywords
deforestation, Amazon, zero-deforestation commitments, Arc of Deforestation, land registry, deforestation monitoring, policy complementarity, grain merchants, conservation policy effectiveness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review