Can a fast food company save the Amazon?

The report revealed that large amounts of soya were shipped to Europe mainly for use in animal feed. The research traced soya from illegal plantations in the Amazon right through the supply chain to food being sold in restaurants and supermarkets. One relatively small-scale but high-profile buyer was McDonald's European operation, which fed the soya to chickens destined to become McNuggets.

While McDonald’s considered the findings of the report Greenpeace staged protests at McDonald's outlets in Europe, and sent its ship, the Arctic Sunrise, to block Cargill's port in the Amazon city of Santarem.

It did not take long for McDonald’s senior management to decide that the company, instead of disputing the evidence, needed to address the problem they had. And this is how the well-known fast-food company with the golden arches, and the global environmentalists came together to pressure the biggest soya traders in Brazil into placing an unprecedented two-year moratorium on the purchase of any soya from newly deforested areas.

McDonald’s bought the soya that fed their chicken from Cargill, one of the world’s largest commodity traders.

Initially Cargill argued that it was bringing economic development to an impoverished region and was already promoting good stewardship practices. Greenpeace, and soon additional environmental groups, replied that the company was inducing farmers to move into environmentally fragile areas, where they often began planting without proper permits and with little understanding of forest conservation.

To increase the pressure on Cargill McDonald’s brought together a coalition of high profile customers in support of their agenda. Faced with its unhappy clients, Cargill brought together other Brazilian soya traders, and they ultimately agreed on the moratorium - an unthinkable response just a few months earlier.

Once the moratorium was in place a working group comprising soya traders, environmental and community organisations and representatives of the Brazilian government was created to agree on what the long term solution to protecting the Amazon would look like.

As the soya moratorium approached its second anniversary and scheduled expiry date in July 2008, the Brazilian soya traders agreed to extend the initiative until July 2009. As the third anniversary of the moratorium now approaches, it is expected that the working group agrees on what mechanisms are required to prevent the loss of the Amazon to uncontrolled agriculture expansion.

Future challenges

The soya moratorium has changed the way producers and traders think about the rainforest. The sector has acknowledged responsibility for its role in deforestation and (in some cases) accepted that it must act.

The urgent need to halt destruction of the Amazon is now firmly on the corporate and political agenda and the moratorium has strengthened the Brazilian Government’s strategies to fight deforestation. Inspired by the success of the moratorium so far, the Brazilian Government is developing similar approaches with the timber and beef industries to bring long-term protection to the Amazon rainforest and combat climate change effectively.

Corporations need to take their commitment to sustainability seriously and do what McDonald’s did - face the facts and take action. Often a company’s response comes down to that of committed individuals, and while it is fantastic that those individuals exist corporations need to ensure that its response goes beyond individual’s commitment and becomes a fundamental part of the company culture. Making a profit cannot be allowed to cost the earth.

Beyond the moratorium, international political will and establishing international finance to keep forests standing is critical. “Forest countries” such as Brazil need to be financially compensated for protecting their forests. This is of critical importance if we are to control climate change and, of course, to protect biodiversity.