We prioritize collective, evidence-based learning to achieve equitable and enduring solutions

The Forests, People, Climate (FPC) Monitoring & Learning (M&L) Framework brings together partnerships, innovation, and knowledge to track collective efforts toward protecting tropical forests across multiple geographies. As a global collaborative, we learn with, and from, our wide network to determine where to focus our efforts and build a case for change.

In order to better understand collective impact worldwide, a set of Global Measures assess momentum towards our goal of halting and reversing tropical deforestation while supporting just, sustainable development. Progress toward this goal represents the result of thousands of actions led by different organizations and movements across the globe.

We look at ten measures with a focus on three geographies holding nearly half of the world’s remaining tropical forests

These measures span the climate, biodiversity, and human dimensions of the goals of FPC.

1. Tropical deforestation

2. Tropical tree cover gain

3. Greenhouse gas emissions from tropical forest loss

4. Carbon dioxide removals by tropical forests

5. Tropical deforestation linked to agriculture

6. Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities, and Afro-descendants' forest tenure

7. Progress of societies in providing people with what they need to thrive

8. Civil society rights: freedoms of assembly, association, and expression

9. Public commitments to keeping forests standing

10. Public funds channeled towards harmful activities put forests at risk

1. Tropical deforestation

In 2022, the world lost 6.3 million hectares[1] (Mha) of tropical tree cover due to deforestation, an area roughly the size of Sri Lanka. Lasting solutions to this challenge have been elusive as incentives continue to favor deforestation over standing forests. Over 96% of all deforestation occurs in the tropics, and the pace of tropical deforestation remains high despite commitments to end deforestation by 2030. [2]

In 2022, more than half (55%) of all tropical deforestation took place in the Congo Basin, Indonesia, and the Brazilian Amazon.

Under the Glasgow Declaration, countries have committed to ending deforestation by 2030.

Why it matters

Meeting global climate and biodiversity goals while
supporting the rights and well-being of people includes eliminating deforestation in the tropics and its long-term impacts, including carbon emissions, destruction of biodiversity – and all too often, the displacement, loss of livelihoods, and destruction of cultural and spiritual sites.
But halting and reversing deforestation requires collective action and systemic change.

Photo by Kynan Tegar

The Brazilian Amazon lost 2 Mha of forests in 2022, a rise of 75% when compared to 2000 – but a decline from historic highs.

In the mid-2000s, the Brazilian government took steps to enforce forest protection laws, and deforestation plummeted, proving to the world that forest protection and economic growth could go hand in hand. But this progress was reversed in the mid-2010s[3], coinciding with the erosion of environmental protections, Indigenous Peoples, Quilombola, and Local Communities’ rights, and enforcement against illegal activity. Preliminary data for 2023 are positive as Brazil charts a path towards more just and sustainable land use.[4]

The Congo Basin lost 639,000 ha of forests in 2022, with the Democratic Republic of the Congo experiencing most of the region’s deforestation.

In the Congo Basin, while small-scale agriculture and charcoal production play a direct role, deeper underlying forces including poverty, food insecurity, and increased extraction of natural resources (including oil, gas, and mining) are driving deforestation and other forms of nature loss.[5] Deforestation rates in Gabon and the Republic of Congo remain low.

Deforestation in Indonesia fell to 828,000 ha in 2022, just one-third of its 2016 rate.

Indonesia has reduced deforestation rates more than any other country in recent years.[6] This is due to a confluence of business action and government policies inspired by catastrophic forest fires in 2015 that caused massive public health impacts—and more people to care. Since then, deforestation rates have dropped. The country instituted a moratorium on clearing of primary forests and peatland and instituted sweeping governance reforms, including an anti-corruption crackdown. The palm oil industry also set, then followed, ambitious commitments to stop deforestation.

Deforestation is defined as the permanent conversion of natural forests to new land uses.[7] It includes three types of tree losses: expansion of small-scale agriculture into primary forests, commodity-driven deforestation, and urbanization of forestland, to exclude forest loss that is temporary (for example, due to fires) or in planted forests.

2. Tropical tree cover gain

Between 2000 and 2020, tropical forest countries gained 38.5 Mha of tree cover.[8] However, the world is not on track[9] to deliver on global restoration pledges including the Bonn Challenge, a commitment to restore 350 Mha of lost and degraded forests worldwide by 2030.[10]

On average, 27% of tropical tree cover gain between 2000 and 2020 took place in FPC focal geographies, far lower than the proportion of deforestation in these same geographies (55%). This is trending downward: from 2015-2020, less than one-fifth of all tropical tree cover gain took place in the Brazilian Amazon, Congo Basin, or Indonesia.

Why it matters

Forest restoration – interventions that aim to improve ecological functionality and enhance human well-being in degraded forest landscapes – is complementary to protecting tropical forests, though it cannot fully reverse the impacts of deforestation on climate, biodiversity, and communities. Forest restoration can improve food security, boost rural livelihoods, and help combat desertification. Done well, restoration also centers forest communities through supportive policy, including secure land tenure and respect for their ancestral knowledge. Yet globally, the world is still losing more forests than it is gaining. And it can take decades for restored forests to provide the same climatic, ecological, cultural, economic, and social benefits of standing forests.

Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash

The Brazilian Amazon has seen steady rates of tree cover gain since 2000, gaining a total of 2.5 Mha of tree cover over 20 years.

Recent policies, including a national plan to recuperate native vegetation and corresponding state-level programs, and commitments, including the Brazilian national bank’s pledge to fund 6 Mha of restoration by 2030, should help galvanize progress.

The Congo Basin saw 2.6 Mha of tree cover gain in total from 2000-2020.

While rates per year appear to be falling, with significant decline from 2000-2005, there are strong calls from within the region for urgent investment in targeted, culturally appropriate restoration initiatives. A holistic approach is needed: one that includes a strong focus on community livelihoods and removing systemic barriers such as unclear land or forest tenure and lack of direct access to finance.

The rate of tree cover gain in Indonesia has declined by nearly 60%, from 1.9 Mha in 2000-2005 to 786,000 hectares in 2015-2020.

Yet in total, tree cover gain in Indonesia was nearly double that of Brazil in this period. Restoration remains central to Indonesia’s 2030 Forest and Land Use (FOLU) “net sink” policy.

Restoration is difficult to measure at a global scale. Here we use “tree cover gain” as a proxy. When combined with data on tree cover loss, it can help give a more complete picture of the net change in forest cover. Data is available as cumulative gain in five-year increments between 2000 and 2020.[11]

3. Greenhouse gas emissions from tropical forest loss

GHG emissions from tropical forest loss more than doubled over the past two decades, peaking at 9,900 metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e)[12] in 2016 – comparable to the GHG emissions from driving over two billion gas-powered passenger cars per year. In 2022, GHG emissions from tropical forest loss exceeded those from fossil fuel use in the United States.

Although the FPC focal geographies account for nearly half of tropical forests, the GHG emissions of other tropical forest countries also contribute significantly to the pantropical total.

Roughly half of all GHG emissions from tropical forest loss come from forest loss in FPC focal geographies.

Why it matters

Forests release carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) into the atmosphere when cleared, burned, or degraded, but absorb only CO2 when they are kept standing or regrown. Deforestation and forest degradation are responsible for approximately 12% of greenhouse gas emissions, and average annual emissions from loss of tropical forests (including but not limited to deforestation) is more than 1.5 times those from loss of temperate, subtropical, and boreal forests combined.[13]

Photo by Kate Evans/CIFOR

The Brazilian Amazon accounted for one-quarter of the world’s GHG emissions from forest loss in 2022, rising to 1,700 MtCO2e.

As deforestation plummeted in the Brazilian Amazon in the mid-2000s, associated GHG emissions halved. Continued loss and degradation of forests in the Amazon Basin threatens to reach a “tipping point” in which the ecosystem converts to savannah and detrimental impacts are felt worldwide.

Despite experiencing an increase in emissions from forest loss since 2001, the Congo Basin remains a net carbon sink due to its extensive remaining forests.

The challenge – keeping emissions from forest loss low – is quite different here compared to Brazil and Indonesia. But it is vital to preserve these vast forests, which are one of the world’s best hopes for mitigating climate change, even as they face increasing threats from oil, gas, agribusiness, and other industries that put nature at risk.

GHG emissions from forest loss in Indonesia fell to just 510 MtCO2e in 2021.[14]

Even considering a slight uptick in 2022, this represents extraordinary progress and rates not seen since the early 2000s. Indonesia has set a net sink target (negative CO2 emissions in the forest and land use sectors) by 2030.

A geospatial framework that combines satellite-based data within the same approach that countries use for their national greenhouse gas inventories gives us a more detailed picture of GHG emissions from forests across the planet. This model uses the same definition of forest that is used in our measure of tropical deforestation.

4. Carbon dioxide removals by tropical forests

On average, tropical forests have absorbed more than 7,000 MtCO2 per year this century. Compared to the average rate of emissions (5,600 MtCO2e/year), forests have been a net sink of approximately 1,500 MtCO2e per year. But this trend masks the fact that while some forests have become strong net sources of GHGs – which occurs when deforestation releases GHGs into the atmosphere – others remain sinks.

Why it matters

Forests are a bulwark against climate change, sequestering roughly one-third of carbon emissions associated with human activities. By comparing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to removals, we can assess where forests are continuing to serve as “carbon sinks”, removing more carbon from the atmosphere than they emit, or have become “carbon sources”, releasing more carbon than they remove.

Tropical forests in FPC focal geographies collectively absorbed nearly 3,000 MtCO2 per year on average from 2001-2022.

Photo by Ulet Ifansasti/Porticus

In the Brazilian Amazon, forests remove over 1,000 MtCO2 per year.

Emissions from forest loss were slightly higher in the Brazilian Amazon, making this region a net source of greenhouse gases since 2000. Recent data across the Amazon biome show that forests managed by Indigenous Peoples are strong net carbon sinks, but forests outside Indigenous lands are collectively a carbon source.[15]

Forests in the Congo Basin remove 1,243 MtCO2 per year.

The Congo Basin is responsible for nearly one-fifth of all greenhouse gasses removed by tropical forests globally.

In Indonesia, forests remove an average of 614 MtCO2 per year.

Average emissions exceeded average removals by a rate of over 300 tCO2e per year in Indonesia. Because this is a 22-year average, it does not reflect the country’s recent success in curbing deforestation and associated emissions.[16]

As with GHG emissions, scientists can combine ground measurements and satellite observations, with national greenhouse gas inventory models. Removals occur more slowly than emissions and annual data on forest growth is not yet available, so we show an average rate of carbon dioxide removals from 2001 to 2022.

5. Tropical deforestation linked to agriculture

Between 2001 and 2022, an average of 4.5 Mha of tropical deforestation per year – or 78% of all tropical deforestation – occurred as a result of commodity production. However, agriculture-linked deforestation has decreased by over one-third since its historic high in 2016, which was largely driven by fire. Seven commodities account for most deforestation linked to commodity agriculture: cattle, oil palm, soy, cocoa, plantation rubber, coffee, and plantation wood fiber (ranked by total area of forests replaced).[17][18]

More than half of all deforestation linked to agricultural commodity production occurred in the Brazilian Amazon, Congo Basin, and Indonesia. However, this ratio has fallen since the early 2000s, indicating that other agricultural frontiers are emerging at the expense of forests.

Why it matters

Agricultural commodity production, driven by burgeoning demand for food, feed, fiber, and fuel, is the most significant driver of tropical deforestation, and therefore of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from land use. This causes irreparable harm to nature and people, particularly Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities, and Afro-descendants. At least two-thirds of tropical deforestation for large-scale commodity agriculture is illegal.[19]

Photo by Kate Evans/CIFOR

More than 26 Mha of agriculture-linked deforestation occurred in the Brazilian Amazon from 2001-2022.

In 2022 alone, rates of commodity-driven deforestation climbed to 1.7 Mha. Cattle production was the largest driver of deforestation, and the Amazon accounted for 70% of forests replaced with cattle in Brazil from 2001-2015.

While the rate of agriculture-linked deforestation has doubled since 2000, it remains comparatively small, at just 5,000 ha on average per year.

Large-scale commodity production is not a significant driver of deforestation in the Congo Basin, though prospective large-scale concessions, largely for oil and gas, may present future threats.

Nearly 30 Mha of deforestation in Indonesia was driven by agricultural commodities from 2001-2022.

Indonesia has the highest rate of deforestation from commodity production, at over 95%, though annual rates have fallen precipitously since peaking in 2016.

The conversion of forest to agricultural (commodity) land use can be detected at a global scale by using a classification model that recognizes various patterns in forest loss, combined with geospatial imagery and, if analyzing specific commodities, recent maps of production areas.[20]

6. Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities, and Afro-descendants' forest tenure

As of 2017, IP, LC & ADs had legally recognized rights to 10.1% of the world’s tropical forests, a 54% increase from 2002.

There is wide variety in the degree of tenure recognition across the three tropical forest basins. While in Brazil, nearly one-third (31.9%) of all forest land was designated for use or owned by IP, LC & ADs as of 2017, in Indonesia and most of the Congo Basin, this figure is below one percent. A closer look at each geography reveals further nuance.

Why it matters

Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities, and Afro-descendants lead the most effective solutions to halting and reversing deforestation, as part of a broader, rights-based approach to combating climate change. The evidence base is strong, and growing: when their territorial rights are recognized, secured, and protected, deforestation is lower[21], carbon stocks are higher[22], and biodiversity is protected.[23][24]

Photo by Ulet Ifansasti/Porticus

In Brazil, forest land designated for use by IP, LC, & AD has nearly quadrupled, from 10.7 Mha in 2002 to 40.4 Mha in 2017.

Forest land owned IP, LC, & AD also grew from 75 Mha in 2002 to 118 Mha in 2017. Nearly half of all forest land under this category across Latin America can be found in Brazil.[25]

Rights are recognized to less than 0.5% of each country’s forest land in the Congo Basin, except for Cameroon, where 3.6 Mha is designated for use by IP & LCs.[26]

While this represents some progress since 2002, the recognition of communities’ forest rights in Africa continues to lag behind progress made in Asia and Latin America, despite positive steps by some countries.

As of 2017, just 790,000 ha of forest land was designated for use by IP & LCs, up from 220,000 in 2002. An additional 100,000 ha is fully owned by IP & LCs.

In 2013, Indonesia’s Constitutional Court ruled that Indigenous Peoples have the right to manage the forests in which they live. Since then, the government has committed to recognizing 12.7 Mha of forest land, but progress has been slow.

Forest tenure is at its core, a local and legal instrument. Like any global metric, it is difficult to apply a consistent approach. This measure adopts a tenure tracking method developed by the Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI) that classifies tenure in four categories: government administered, privately owned by individuals and firms, and either owned by or designated for IP, LC & ADs.[27]

7. Progress of societies in providing people with what they need to thrive

Social progress is a people-centered measure focused on non-economic aspects of basic needs, wellbeing, and opportunity.

The past decade has seen steady growth in social progress across tropical forest countries. While FPC focal geographies, in the aggregate, experienced a similar rate of growth, their average score was consistently lower than the rest of the tropics and the pantropical region as a whole by approximately four points.

Why it matters

Advancing equitable and enduring solutions can only be achieved if actors closest to the urgent problems of the climate crisis, tropical deforestation, and unsustainable development are able to execute self-determined solutions.

Photo by Michael Padmanaba/CIFOR

Within FPC geographies, however, there is considerable variation in social progress and rate of change.

The Brazilian Amazon has a much lower Social Progress Index (SPI) score (54.46 in 2023) than the national average (68.9),[28] and growth has been slow.

Though the overall score for the Brazilian Amazon is low, several components of the composite index are relatively high-scoring, including nutrition and social inclusiveness. However, the overall score suffers due to unmet needs. One example is that violence remains a chronic problem with high homicide rates in Amazonian municipalities. Components related to shelter and access to basic knowledge have seen the largest increases in scores; on the other hand, social inclusiveness and individual freedoms of choice have shown the largest decreases. An uptick in deforestation between 2020-2022 contributed to the low score for the environmental quality component. However, deforestation rates are now once again trending downward and can positively influence this score in the future.

Social progress in the Congo Basin improved by 15% from 2011 to 2023 but remains lower than other FPC geographies.

There is considerable variation within the region, from Central African Republic (lowest) to Gabon (highest). Like Brazil and Indonesia, the Congo Basin is most lacking in the opportunity dimension, apart from the DRC, in which meeting basic needs remains a challenge.

In Indonesia, social progress improved by 13% from 2011 to 2023.

SPI scores are strongest in the dimension of basic needs, and weakest in opportunity. The highest-scoring metrics were housing and water and sanitation, while the lowest-scoring were advanced education (including academic freedom and women in higher education) and inclusivity (including discrimination and violence against minorities).

The Social Progress Index assesses “how well a society provides its people with the things they care about.” It contains 57 unique metrics related to basic needs, well-being, and opportunity. The SPI is a people-centered alternative to traditional measures of economic performance such as GDP.

8. Civil society rights: freedoms of assembly, association, and expression

Global civic freedoms rates vary between tropical forest countries. The majority of these countries are rated “obstructed” or “repressed,” with very few countries showing improvements in the past five years.

Photo by J Sidle

Why it matters

The most successful social movements to protect the world’s forests are those led by, and accountable to, those directly impacted by the deforestation crisis. But the current infrastructure aimed at halting and reversing deforestation remains distant and insufficient to support the efforts of these actors, who face increasing threats. Civic space is a key enabling condition for civil society to defend rights, access resources, mitigate threats to forests and people, and pursue self-determined development. It is therefore foundational to FPC.

In Brazil, a review of CIVICUS data cited deep concerns with declining freedom of expression, notably through legal and extra-legal harassment of human rights defenders, journalists, and government critics.[29]

Recent years have seen a weakening of environmental regulations and enforcement thereof, and thus an increase in illegal exploitation and encroachment in Indigenous, Quilombola, and Local Communities’ lands. Brazil is also the second-most dangerous country in the world to be an environmental defender, with 20% of defender killings tracked between 2012 and 2022 occurring in Brazil.[30]

The Congo Basin has seen some movement towards more open civil society, particularly in the Central African Republic and DRC, though the region remains “repressed.”

CSOs are largely underfunded and lack sufficient capacity to advocate for protection of forests and well-being of communities. Political instability and conflict in the region can also lead to displacement, weak governance, humanitarian crises, and risk of violence.

In Indonesia, civic space is shrinking.

International and national institutions cite greater legal and political barriers to freedom of expression and action, compromising civil society’s ability to monitor and challenge the exploitation of forests.[31]

One of the many global indices measuring some degree of civic space, the CIVICUS Monitor analyzes the extent to which the three civil society rights – freedom of assembly, freedom of association, and freedom of expression – are being respected and upheld. It also assesses the degree to which states are protecting civil society. CIVICUS combines independent qualitative and quantitative data from a range of sources via standard calculations and verification checks, and rates each country as: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed, or closed.

9. Public commitments to keeping forests standing

Between 2010-2022, governments committed US$26.5 billion in domestic and international public green finance.[32] While overall finance pledges have increased over the past decade, this represents a fraction of what is needed. As of October 2023, just over $5.7 billion had been disbursed.[33] Half of the commitments assessed are reportedly on track, but the remainder are either off track or have not publicly disclosed progress. The UN estimates that overall public financing for nature-based solutions – including, but not limited to, forest protection – reached $165 billion in 2023, up from $153 billion in 2022.[34]

Why it matters

Significant finance is needed at scale to halt and reverse deforestation. By one estimate, shifting markets to favor standing forests and protect nature will require approximately $500 billion per year.[35] But given the substantial economic benefits that standing forests provide, including carbon sequestration, cooler temperatures, watersheds and biodiversity protection, ecotourism, and sustainable jobs, this investment will pay dividends.

Photo by Kynan Tegar

“Green” finance is defined as investment that aligns with objectives for conservation, protection, restoration, or sustainable use of forests. The three graphics draw from Forest Declaration Assessment (FDA) reports and represent commitments by governments, but not private investments.

10. Public funds channeled towards harmful activities put forests at risk

Global agricultural subsidies have doubled since 2000, reaching $631 billion in 2021 for the economies tracked by OECD. This figure could reach $1.8 trillion per year by 2030 if current trends are not reversed.[36] The UN estimates that total public “gray” (nature-negative) finance in 2022 was almost $1.7 trillion per year, more than 10 times the rate of public “green” finance.[37] Governments should phase out harmful subsidies, and repurpose them towards nature-positive food systems.

Why it matters

A transformation of public investment that harms forests is needed to shift incentives that favor deforestation, currently underpinned by a viewpoint that conservation is an impediment to economic growth. Given the role of agriculture as the largest driver of deforestation, we focus on agricultural subsidies. These are designed to improve food security and economic growth but can catalyze unsustainable land use, market distortion, and expansion into forestland, in many cases with adverse effects on local livelihoods and human health.[38]

Photo by Kynan Tegar

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has tracked public agricultural support, defined as “the annual monetary value of gross transfers to agriculture from consumers and taxpayers arising from government policies”, since the 1980s. This is used as a proxy for “grey” finance, defined broadly as investments with negative impact on nature.[39]

Enhancing our strategic approaches

These measures complement Monitoring & Learning frameworks that have been fully integrated into FPC’s nine strategies. These include a participatory process to map out how change occurs, a means of generating knowledge informed by the most critical evidence needs of organizations closest to the work, and a platform for reflection and learning.

Our Priorities