We Can't Plant Our Way Out: Why Forest Conservation Needs a Policy Reset

Global net forest loss has dropped to 4.12 million hectares per year in 2015–2025, down from 10.7 million in the 1990s (FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2025). That sounds like progress, and in some ways it is. But dig deeper and the picture darkens. In 2024, tropical primary forest loss hit 6.7 million hectares—nearly double the 2023 total, an area roughly the size of Panama (WRI Global Forest Review). We are celebrating a slowdown in net loss while primary forests—the most carbon-dense, biodiverse, irreplaceable ecosystems we have—are still being slashed and burned at a staggering rate. The uncomfortable truth is that our current policy toolkit, obsessed with planting trees and certifying sustainable harvests, is failing to protect what actually matters. We need a fundamental reset: stop treating reforestation as the answer and start treating primary forest protection as the only policy that counts.

The Myth of Net Gain

When we hear that net deforestation is declining, we assume the world's forests are recovering. The FAO's numbers tell a more complicated story. Gross deforestation has slowed, but it still amounts to 10.9 million hectares per year from 2015 to 2025 (FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2025). Meanwhile, forest expansion—the planting and natural regrowth that offsets those losses—has actually slowed, from 9.88 million hectares per year in 2000–2015 to 6.78 million in 2015–2025 (FAO Newsroom). So the improvement in net loss is not because we're restoring more; it's because we're destroying slightly less. And even that 'less' is concentrated in a few places. Brazil cut primary forest loss by 36 percent in 2023, a real victory (WRI Global Forest Review). But in 2024, Brazil's fire-driven primary forest loss shot up more than sixfold, accounting for 42 percent of all tropical primary forest loss that year (WRI Global Forest Review). We are treading water, and the current is getting stronger.

Planting Trees Is Not Conservation

Governments love tree-planting pledges. China has added about 1.6 million hectares of forest per year, and Russia another 942,000 hectares (FAO Forest Resources Assessment 2025). The Bonn Challenge has gathered pledges to restore over 210 million hectares since 2011 (IUCN Bonn Challenge press release). These initiatives have real value, but they are not substitutes for protecting primary forests. Planted forests cover about 312 million hectares, only 8 percent of global forest area, and they cannot replicate the biodiversity or carbon storage of a natural forest (FAO Newsroom). Primary forests cover at least 1.18 billion hectares—about a third of all forest—and harbour the majority of terrestrial species (FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2025; FAO Feature Story). A plantation of fast-growing eucalyptus is not a forest; it's a tree farm. When we conflate the two in policy, we give cover to continued destruction of primary forest while pointing to reforestation statistics as proof of our virtue.

The Fire Paradox and the Invasive Threat

Some will argue that we must focus on restoration because climate change is making forests more vulnerable to fire and pests—that we can't protect what's already doomed. It's true that fires in 2024 emitted 4.1 gigatonnes of greenhouse gases, more than four times the emissions from all air travel in 2023 (WRI Global Forest Review). Canada's 2023 fire season was its worst on record, with a five-fold increase in tree cover loss due to fire (WRI Global Forest Review). In 2024, fires overtook agriculture as the leading cause of tropical primary forest loss for the first time on record (WRI Global Forest Review). But this is not an argument for giving up on standing forests; it's an argument for managing them better. Insects and diseases, like the emerald ash borer that has killed hundreds of millions of ash trees in North America, are a serious threat (USDA NISIC). Yet the answer to invasive pests is not more planting—it's stronger biosecurity and early detection. The answer to fire is not to ignore it—it's to invest in fire management and reduce the human-caused ignitions that start most blazes.

We Need a Policy Reset: Protect Primary, Period

What would a policy reset look like? First, we must distinguish between 'forest' and 'primary forest' in every piece of legislation, corporate sustainability target, and international agreement. We should adopt a simple rule: no net loss of primary forest anywhere, by anyone, for any reason. This is not radical; it's pragmatic. Primary forests are irreplaceable carbon stores—global forest carbon stocks stand at 714 gigatonnes (FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2025)—and they are disproportionately important for biodiversity. Second, we need to shift funding from tree-planting projects to protection of existing forests. For every dollar spent on planting a new plantation, we should spend ten on securing tenure and enforcement in primary forests. Indigenous territories are the best example of this: satellite data in the Amazon shows far less deforestation in lands managed by Indigenous peoples than in parks (NASA Earth Observatory). Supporting Indigenous land rights is the most effective conservation policy we have. Third, we must make supply chains pay for the true cost of deforestation. The EU's Deforestation Regulation is a step in the right direction, requiring companies to prove their products are deforestation-free (EU Regulation on Deforestation-free Products). But it covers only seven commodities and doesn't explicitly protect primary forests from legal but destructive logging. We need to expand its scope and enforce it rigorously.

What I'd actually do

Enough with the incrementalism. Here is what we should do: convene a global summit on primary forest protection, with a single agenda item—how to achieve zero primary forest loss by 2030. The Glasgow Leaders Declaration, signed by 145 countries, already commits to halting and reversing forest loss by 2030 (WRI Global Forest Review). Let's hold them to it. I would push for a legally binding treaty that defines primary forests, bans their conversion, and establishes a fund to support countries that protect them. I would tie development aid and trade preferences to verified reductions in primary forest loss. And I would insist that every company reporting net-zero targets must disclose not just their total forest footprint, but their primary forest footprint. Planting trees is not conservation. Conservation means keeping standing forests standing. It's time we act like it.

Sources

• FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2025 - https://www.un-redd.org/post/global-deforestation-slows-forests-remain-under-pressure-fao-report-shows
• WRI Global Forest Review: 2023 tree cover loss - https://gfr.wri.org/global-tree-cover-loss-data-2023
• WRI: Global Forest Loss Shatters Records in 2024 - https://www.wri.org/news/release-global-forest-loss-shatters-records-2024-fueled-massive-fires
• FAO Forest Resources Assessment 2025 - https://www.fao.org/forest-resources-assessment/en/
• IUCN Bonn Challenge press release - https://iucn.org/press-release/202511/germany-and-iucn-celebrate-15-years-bonn-challenge-worlds-largest-restoration
• NASA Earth Observatory: Tropical Deforestation - https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Deforestation