The document discusses the challenges of balancing agricultural expansion, particularly soybean and cattle ranching, with conservation efforts in Mato Grosso, a region facing high deforestation rates. It highlights the potential for increasing productivity in Brazilian pasturelands to meet future agricultural demands while sparing natural areas, emphasizing the importance of associating productivity incentives with conservation measures. The document also warns of the rebound effect, where increased productivity may lead to further land conversion if not managed carefully.

1. Mato Grosso: realising the land-sparing potential
from increased agricultural productivity
Bernardo Baeta Neves Strassburg
b.strassburg@iis-rio.org
Instituto Internacional para Sustentabilidade
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

2. Mato Grosso Context
•Highest deforestation rates of the
Amazon and Cerrado
•40% of state natural cover converted
•Strong projected increase of soybean
for the next decade (up to 3.5 mi ha)
9,0
Soybean Area (mi ha)
8,5
8,0 Remaining
Biome Deforested Area Total Area
Area
7,5
Km2 % Km2 % Km2 %
7,0 Amazon 204 39 322 61 526 58
Cerrado 157 42 220 58 377 42
6,5
Total 361 40 542 60 903 100
6,0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

3. Increasing Cattle Ranching Productivity as main option to
conciliate conservation and agricultural expansion
Improved Use of Existing Lands: Meeting Demands and Sparing Nature in Brazil
Strassburg, BBN; Latawiec, AE; Barioni, LG; Assad, E; Valentin, J; Porfirio dos Santos, V; Nobre, C.
under review, Nature Climate Change
•First estimate of the potential to increase productivity of Brazilian pasturelands;
•Current Productivity = 32% carrying capacity
•Increasing it to 49-51% would suffice to meet all projected land demands up to
2040;
Current Productivity Potential Productivity Alocation in 2040

4. But…
… will land sparing follow cattle
ranching intensification ?

5. Land Sparing vs. Rebound Effect
Price S1
•Increased Productivity S2
•More production per area
•Higher returns per unit produced Demand*
•The relative weight of these effects will
determine the final impact of increased
productivity Q1 Q2 Quantity
* For producers
in region under
intervention
Soybean in Mato Grosso:
1990 2000
Productivity (t/ha) 2.01 3.02
Production (mi t) 3.0 8.7
Area (mi ha) 1.5 2.9 Rebound Effect

6. So…
… how to realise the potential for
land sparing from increased
productivity?

7. Associate incentives to increase productivity with conservation measures
Challenge
Conciliate conservation and
agriculture expansion
Components
Conservation of Restoration of Improved Use of
remaining forests Degraded Forests Agricultural lands
Monitor and
Control illegal strengthen the Increase productivity
deforestation compliance with forest (Good practices)
code
Strategies
Apply market pressure Provide technical Increase area under
against deforestation assiatance, credit and multiple uses: Crop-
(soy moratorium, incentives Livestock, Agroforestry,
sectoral agreements) Silvipastoral systems
Create incentives for the
conservation and Implement spatial
sustainable management planning to prioritise
of the forest areas

8. Associate incentives to increase productivity with land sparing
“Land Neutral Agricultural Expansion”(LNAE*) mechanism
•Incentives for cattle ranching intensification associated with the
mitigation or compensation of agricultural expansion (soybean);
“Land Neutral Ecological Restoration”(LNER*) mechanism
•Incentives for cattle ranching intensification associated with
ecological restoration;
* Strassburg, B. (2012) – IIS Working Paper

9. The “Land Neutral Agricultural Expansion” Mechanism
In-Farm Mitigation
Consortium Compensation
Multiple Uses Single Use+Intensification
Before
1000 Heads
1000 Heads of Cattle 1000 Heads of Cattle 1000 Heads
1000 Heads
1500 Heads
After
1000 Heads in Crop- 1000
Soy 1500 Heads
Livestock System Heads
Soy

10. Take home messages
•Land sparing does not necessarily follow increased productivity;
•Quite often the opposite occurs, due to the “rebound effect”
•But increased productivity carries the potential for land sparing,
under some circumstances
•Associated with increased costs of forest conversion
•It is also possible to condition the incentives for increased
productivity to activities that ensure land sparing;

11. Thank You
Bernardo Baeta Neves Strassburg
b.strassburg@iis-rio.org
Instituto Internacional para Sustentabilidade
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil