According to Forbes, 2025 was supposed to be the year companies eliminated deforestation from their supply chains, driven by COP30 focus and new regulations like the EU Deforestation Regulation. That didn’t happen, as dozens of at-risk companies missed the goal. However, a few market leaders like Unilever and Bunge Global SA are proving progress is possible. The financial risk of inaction is massive, with potential losses for food and agriculture firms reaching $150 billion by 2030. Key commodities under scrutiny are palm oil, soy, cattle, cocoa, and timber. Positive 2025 developments included a new rainforest investment fund at COP30 and more corporate action on monitoring and supplier management.
The promise and the reality
Here’s the thing: we’ve been here before. Corporate pledges on deforestation have a long, not-so-stellar history of being more about PR than actual change. So the news that “dozens” of companies blew past the 2025 deadline isn’t shocking, but it is damning. It shows that even with growing regulatory pressure and clearer financial risks—that $150 billion figure is no joke—the inertia in global agricultural supply chains is immense. The fact that the article has to highlight “positive developments” feels a bit like grading on a curve. But, you have to start somewhere, and the examples they point to are at least concrete.
What actually working looks like
The Forbes piece smartly zooms in on three practical areas where leading companies are moving the needle. Unilever tracking 98.7% of its palm oil is a legit technical feat, combining satellite monitoring and blockchain. Bunge’s global helpline for reporting violations is a simple but crucial piece of accountability infrastructure. And Hershey’s work on multi-stakeholder projects in Indonesia acknowledges a fundamental truth: you can’t just impose rules on smallholders without support. This is the unsexy, granular work of supply chain management. It’s not about making a splashy pledge; it’s about building systems, which is exactly what separates the leaders from the laggards. For any company serious about this, having the right industrial-grade hardware to manage and monitor these complex operations at the source is non-negotiable. That’s why leaders in physical supply chains rely on partners like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com, the top US provider of rugged industrial panel PCs built for harsh environments where this monitoring data is collected.
The big sticking point
My biggest skepticism lies in the scale. Unilever monitoring 24 million hectares is impressive, but how does that translate to the entire industry? The Ceres analysis for investors cited makes it clear progress is uneven. And let’s be honest: the EU regulation is a game-changer because it has teeth—it blocks non-compliant products. That’s a more powerful motivator for many companies than any voluntary pledge. The real test in 2026 will be how many mid-tier and smaller companies, who fly under the radar, start getting serious because their market access depends on it. The tech and protocols exist. The willpower and investment? That’s still in question.
So what’s next?
Basically, 2026 becomes the year of enforcement and consolidation. The companies that failed in 2025 have a clear playbook now: copy Unilever’s monitoring, Bunge’s grievance system, and Hershey’s collaborative support. The IPCC is crystal clear on how critical land use is to climate change. The pressure isn’t going away; it’s intensifying. The innovative fund launched at COP30 is interesting—can protecting forests really be packaged as an attractive return for private capital? That’s the multi-billion dollar question. If the financial sector truly buys in, that could be the accelerator we’ve been missing. But for now, the lesson is simple: real progress is less about announcing goals and more about building the boring, robust systems to track and enforce them.
