Global Witness | 15 May 2025Argentinean “agricultural real estate” company Cresud is responsible for deforestation three times the size of Madrid and significant carbon emissions
Major Spanish bank Santander has helped fund one of South America’s worst deforesters by co-arranging $1.3 billion of financing for agribusiness giant Cresud since 2011, Global Witness can reveal.
This financing increased despite the bank adopting a policy to “limit” deforestation in 2018 as well as setting a net zero target in 2021.
Santander’s support of Cresud’s business model has allowed the company to accelerate its geographical expansion over the last two decades.
This is despite the agricultural giant deforesting 170,000 hectares on its farms since the turn of the century, according to Global Witness’ new analysis.
The scale of this deforestation is equivalent to three times the size of Spanish capital Madrid.
The likely emissions from this deforestation – in some of the most carbon rich and biodiverse forests in the world – is the estimated equivalent of thirty million transatlantic flights.
Cresud and its subsidiary, BrasilAgro, are also implicated in multiple controversies concerning Indigenous Peoples’ livelihoods across South America.
Despite the company’s history, Global Witness can reveal that Cresud has been awarded sustainability certifications for two of its farms. The company has also made clear its desire to access the carbon credit market to receive payments for the remaining forests on their properties.
Campaigners in Argentina and in Europe are sceptical of the company’s sustainability claims and one Indigenous campaigner made a plea to the bank to “invest in something more sustainable, more beneficial.”
Santander is the largest EU-headquartered financier of Cresud. The $1.3 billion was jointly underwritten by Santander with multiple Argentinean and international banks, with Santander frequently taking the role of a lead underwriter.
The bank did not deny in correspondence with Global Witness that it would continue to finance Cresud.
Last year, Santander was the EU’s largest creditor to “forest-risk” companies directly involved in beef, palm oil, soy and other agricultural supply-chains driving most tropical deforestation.
"Agricultural real estate"
In 1994, a new CEO took over Argentinean company Cresud with a novel business plan. What if you took the approach of real estate investing, and applied it to the country’s rural land?
Over 30 years later, the answer is clear. The company has had phenomenal financial success. Cresud has grown enormously. In 2010, the firm made US$49 million in revenue. By 2024, this had grown to $1.4 billion.
In 2005, it set up a subsidiary called BrasilAgro to expand its Argentinean business model and now owns farms in neighbouring countries Paraguay, Bolivia and Brazil.
Cresud and BrasilAgro are publicly traded companies, including on the New York Stock Exchange.
The business plan is simple.
“We see the countryside as an asset which can be bought and sold,” said Cresud’s Argentinean manager, Diego Chillado Biaus, in July 2024.
“We go to the areas where people don't like to go, face production volatility, we manage to stabilise them (the fields) and we sell them to start up again.”
While Cresud waits for the price of the farms to appreciate, the land is used to grow soy, wheat and sunflowers, as well as for cattle ranching.
Behind the financial success lies a trail of destruction. Cresud avoids the word “deforestation” in public-facing materials and uses many euphemistic terms like “stabilise” in their public facing materials and statements – “developing” land to achieve its “productive potential”, and land “transformation”.
Cresud acknowledges the “material risk” that stronger environmental laws could harm its business model and could risk future profits.
Investing in environmental destruction
Santander’s Argentinean subsidiary has been part of multiple consortia that has provided over USD $1.3 billion of finance to Cresud. It is the largest EU-based bank financing the company.
Global Witness analysed publicly available data for Cresud bond issuances since 2009. Santander is a lead or principal underwriter for 35 of the 47 bonds issued by the company since 2002, and consortia co-lead by the bank accounts for over 90% of the total dollar value of bonds issued by the company.
Santander co-led banking groups have helped underwrite over three-quarters of the bonds issued by the company since 2011, and the bank has provided over $50 million in loans to Cresud directly.
When a bank like Santander underwrites a bond for a company, it is helping them to raise money from other investors, guaranteeing to buy the bond if it is not sold. Santander also holds shares in Cresud.
In 2018, Santander released a sustainability policy in which the company outlined a new approach to financing the sector.
The policy stated: “Santander Group has decided to limit its involvement in certain activities (subject to their environmental and social impacts being previously analysed in detail), such as oil and gas activities in sensitive geographical areas, or the activities related to paper pulp and paper, palm oil or soy production.”
The policy has been updated but still does not clearly rule out investing or underwriting projects linked to deforestation.
Since the policy was first published, Santander has been a co-underwriter of $850 million dollars of debt for Cresud.
Ola Janus leads BankTrack’s Banks and Nature campaign. The NGO campaigns to hold banks accountable to their commitments.
“Santander’s vague policies leave the door wide open for deforestation and human rights abuses tied to South American agribusiness. To show real commitment to ending deforestation, Santander should start by explicitly requiring clients and their suppliers not to contribute to the conversion or degradation of natural ecosystems,” she says.
The bank also has a stated goal of net zero emissions in its portfolio by 2050 and was a founding member of the Net Zero Banking Alliance, a group of banks with the same goal.
Santander is the EU’s third largest bank by assets, and the bloc’s largest creditor of "forest-risk" companies. In 2024, the bank loaned over $600 million to companies directly involved in beef, palm oil, soy and other agricultural supply-chains driving most tropical deforestation, according to Forest and Finance data.
In recent years, Global Witness has demonstrated Santander’s financial links to major agribusinesses linked to deforestation, including JBS, Minerva and Cargill.
Global Witness asked Santander whether their financing of Cresud constituted a violation of their own policies. The bank states that its “consistent practice is not to comment on information relating to clients or specific transactions.”
A spokesperson from Santander also described Global Witness’ allegations as "containing imprecisions and potential information regarding our policies that is not accurate” but declined to provide specific evidence to support these claims.
A trail of devastation through South American forests
Global Witness’ analysis reveals the true environmental and social costs of Cresud’s expansion and Santander’s financing.
An analysis of satellite data suggests that the company has deforested over 170,000 ha across Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay since 2001 – an area three times larger than Madrid.
The forests affected include the Argentinean and Paraguayan Chaco, the Bolivian Chiquitano and the Brazilian Cerrado.
These forests are some of the most biodiverse and carbon rich in the world. They are also home to numerous Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
Argentinean climate scientist Matías Mastrangelo spoke to Global Witness about the Gran Chaco forest, the biome most affected by Cresud’s deforestation.
“From a biological and cultural point of view, it is a unique place. It is a great carbon reservoir. The population has a cultural richness which is being lost with deforestation,” Mastrangelo says.
An estimation of carbon emissions related to this deforestation suggests that it is the equivalent of a passenger taking over 30 million transatlantic flights.
Cresud frequently sells farms to other businesses. In this analysis, Global Witness was only able to analyse deforestation on properties currently held by the company, which could mean that real deforestation numbers are higher.
Cresud and BrasilAgro did not respond to multiple requests for comment by Global Witness. In a response to a request for comment for in 2021 after a deforestation-focused investigation by Agencia Publica, BrasilAgro said “we conduct our business using the very best practices in corporate governance.”
The company added “We would like to reiterate that all deals and transactions carried out by the company are in line with the relevant legislation.”
On the ground
In Paraguay, over 25,000 ha of forest has been cleared on one farm called Palmeiras Moroti.
Agropecuaria Morotí, a subsidiary of BrasilAgro, purchased the farm outright in 2018, which had previously been co-owned.
It has since sold 863 ha of the property.
Global Witness investigators visited the farm to witness the devastation in 2024.
Enormous dry fields stretched out far into the distance. Around them, only thin strips of forests remained.
The farm stretched over an enormous expanse of land where the destruction has been immense.
Nothing appeared to be growing.
Cresud’s deforestation in Paraguay is not an isolated example.
In Argentina, over 60,000 ha have been cleared on a single farm, Estancia Los Pozos in Salta Province, since its acquisition in 1997.
In Brazil, Cresud deforested 10,000 ha in only three years (2016-2018) at their farm Fazenda Chaparral. The slider below shows the clearance.
Deforestation does not only affect the climate and biodiversity. It also affects those who call the forest home.
Drought, deforestation and heat
In the North of Argentina, the expansion of agrobusiness and the destruction of forests has had severe consequences.
Sergio Rojas is an Indigenous activist from the Qom community in Northern Argentina.
“With all the deforestation, the estuaries and gullies, the fresh water, have dried up, and that is now a big problem,” says Sergio.
Global Witness also spoke to a leader from the Wichí Indigenous community on condition of anonymity.
“Before [the deforestation], we could walk barefoot to the river without getting burned. Today we can't even walk 20 meters to visit our uncle's house barefoot, because the heat is unbearable, it burns your feet.”
In 2023, Argentina saw its worst drought in 60 years. This drought was preceded by long absences of rain in the two years prior.
Matías Mastrangelo says that local deforestation accelerates these changes.
“When these processes of deforestation or degradation of vegetation occur, where that plant mass is lost, what one is losing is the connection, the water cycle of that vegetation links you to the atmosphere with the soil. The vegetation is the bridge.”
For Sergio, companies like Cresud are part of the problem: “In the Chaco and Formosa provinces, [multinationals] divert rivers to provide artificial irrigation for crops, for example, soybeans or sunflowers,” he says.
“We are in a very difficult situation, because there is nothing to eat, nothing to drink, and the temperatures at the moment are also extreme.”
Community conflicts
Cresud and BrasilAgro have had long term issues with land acquisition and conflicts with local groups and Indigenous Peoples.
Salta is a northern province in Argentina that has been ravaged by deforestation in recent years. A company planning land use change on their property must consult the peoples affected.
Analysing a selection of Cresud’s public audiences in Salta in recent years, they frequently fall in the morning on normal working days, which may make it difficult for local people to attend.
Despite this, in 2021, a reportedly full room turned up to protest Cresud’s proposed plan to deforest 3,383 hectares. An elected representative of Salta province turned up to back Cresud’s plans.
Under international law, Indigenous Peoples and local communities have the right to deny projects that affect their way of life, and must give free, prior and informed consent for projects that affect them to continue.
This is codified in the International Labour Organisation’s Convention 169, an international treaty signed by Argentina in 2000.
Hernán Giardini is an Argentinean forest campaigner, who has campaigned against deforestation in northern Argentina for decades.
In Argentina, the organisation of public audiences is the responsibility of provincial governments such as Salta.
He is scathing about how these public audiences are organised.
“[Audiences] are often held kilometres away from the communities. Communities sometimes don’t have the money to get there. In the case of indigenous communities, they don’t translate [the audience] into the community language.”
“The reality is, the public audience can’t be considered free, prior and informed consent. Furthermore, these consultations are not binding, they’re just audiences.”
There is no suggestion that Cresud is responsible for such deficiencies.
In Paraguay, the Morotí farm’s “reserve” – a small section of their farm that must not be deforested by law – overlaps with an area owned by the Paraguay Indigenous ministry on behalf of the Cuyabia Ayoreo group.
“At no time did the company do any type of consultation with the Indigenous ministry or any of the NGOs that work with the Indigenous Peoples there,” according to an anonymous source from an environmental NGO in Paraguay.
“Only once did they consult us for a lot near to the Cuyabia land, and that was when a rezoning survey was already underway.”
For now, BrasilAgro has not deforested any land within the Ayoreo territory in Paraguay, and a fragile peace remains.
In Brazil, a Mongabay investigation cites a researcher visiting one of BrasilAgro’s farms in Bahia state n 2018, who described some springs near one of their properties as now being a site of “total desertification”.
BrasilAgro’s farms there, Jatobá and Chaparral, are located close to the village of Capão do Modesto, which has reportedly seen violence and conflict between villagers and soy producers, also due to a shortage of water.
In a statement to Mongabay, BrasilAgro said that “all [of the] company’s operations are carried out within the law” and described “any statement different from this being libelous and defamatory.”
The company has also faced conflict with indigenous peoples in Bolivia. In 2021, the Bolivian land ministry ruled that BrasilAgro’s properties overlapped with the Guarayos Forestry Reserve, the historical lands of the indigenous Guarayo people. As of January 2025, a decision on the legal status of the property appears not to have been concluded.
In March 2024, BrasilAgro published a press release that reported that farms had been “invaded”, which appeared to be related to ongoing land disputes in the region. At the time of writing, no further communication from the company regarding the property’s status had been issued.
“Something more positive, more beneficial”
In Argentina, Global Witness asked the leader of the Wichí Indigenous community what he thought of banks like Santander financing Cresud.
“It is regrettable that they do not invest in something more positive, more beneficial.”
Santander’s website shows that it wants to be seen as a green bank. It has launched several pro-forest initiatives in recent years, including Biomas, a scheme to restore forest in Brazil, and the Innovative Finance for the Amazon, Cerrado and Chaco (IFACC).
Global Witness asked Santander whether the bank would continue to finance Cresud after these revelations.
Santander did not deny the possibility of future financing to Cresud and stated that “the Bank’s consistent practice is not to comment on information relating to clients or specific transactions.”
Sustainable certification?
In recent years, Cresud’s subsidiary BrasilAgro has faced public criticisms for deforestation.
While the company’s core model – purchase, “develop”, wait and sell – remains the same, Cresud says that it is pursuing a more sustainable strategy.
Cresud received sustainable certification for two of the company farms in 2024. These farms, La Gramillia and El Tigre, have been certified for sustainable soy and corn production.
This certification is a self-described attempt to obtain more competitive financing and a better price for its soy and corn.
The certification body, the Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS), permits certification for farms where natural forests have not been cleared since 2009.
For Cresud, the certification proved its “respect with local communities” and “care for the environment.”
Although there has been no deforestation on the company’s two certified farms, one campaigner worries that international buyers of Cresud soy may be misled.
“Purchasing RTRS soy is no guarantee that a buyer is sourcing from a sustainable company, primarily because companies do not have to certify all of their farms. Instead, they can cherry-pick those they wish to certify while continuing environmental and human rights abuses on others,“ says Earthsight researcher Lara Shirra White.
When approached for comment, RTRS stated that it “unequivocally reject[s] the allegations put forth by Global Witness” and said the organisations’ standards are developed through a “comprehensive multi-stakeholder process, involving public consultations, a dedicated working group, and multiple stages of approval.”
It stated that certification bodies, not RTRS itself, are responsible for issuing certificates.
When asked whether allowing companies to certify small numbers of deforestation-free farms could risk misleading consumers to believe that they were buying from a sustainable company, RTRS did not directly address the concern.
Instead, it stated that that RTRS “in no way authorize[s] producers who meet RTRS’ certification standards and principles to violate applicable labor and criminal laws. This includes engaging in deforestation or committing human rights abuses within the supply chain while misrepresenting themselves as sustainable.”
50 Shades of Green?
Cresud also hopes to receive money for the carbon stored in forests on their properties.
In 2022, BrasilAgro CEO Andre Guillamon boasted that the financial potential of the carbon at one of the company farms, Nova Buriti, was enough to write a book: “50 Shades of Green”.
On the potential of carbon, Guillamon added, “I have no doubt that this will be a driver of results in the future.”
Guillamon said that the company wanted to seek financing for the carbon stocks held on preservation areas.
According to the company’s 2022 sustainability report, BrasilAgro has received “rewards” at Sao Jose farm for the “environmental services provided by its protected areas for the carbon stored in the soil through its good agricultural practices [sic]”.
In 2023, Guillamon stated that he wanted to work through the REDD system to emit carbon credits for the Nova Buriti farm for avoided deforestation.
Yet as reported by Brazilian outlet O Eco, BrasilAgro only dropped the plan to deforest Buriti after months of pressure from Brazilian civil society, having received approval to deforest the area from the Environment and Sustainable Development ministry in 2019.
Chris Lang, an offsets expert at REDD Monitor, says “It's crucially important to look at agribusiness corporations' entire emissions from all of the company's operations and supply chain, and not just a project area selected by the company.”
Hernán Giardini is also sceptical that carbon credits can drive change.
“At this point [of the climate crisis] deforestation should be something that is prohibited, and there should be no rewards for not deforesting,” says the Greenpeace campaigner.
Back in Argentina, Global Witness asked Sergio his opinion on Cresud’s approach to the countryside and his hope for change.
“It is a completely capitalist approach. The [company] think only to destroy the environment and make more money. They can’t be thinking about the future, because what world are we going to leave to our children here and the future generations?”
Data analysis and visualisation by Jan Oledan
What is the relationship between Cresud and BrasilAgro?
BrasilAgro was set up by Cresud in 2005 to expand the company’s footprint in Brazil.
Brazil has limits on the amount of land that can be controlled by foreign investors. According to a 2010 Brazilian law, “a foreign investor or even a local company, with more than a 50 percent stake controlled by foreign investors, will face restrictions to acquire land.”
According to a 2021 investigation by Agencia Publica, BrasilAgro is suspected of working its way around limits imposed on the sale of land to foreign buyers. Cresud lists “the imposition of restrictions on acquisitions of agricultural properties by foreign nationals in Brazil” as a material risk in a 2023 declaration to the SEC, as well as the struggles it has had on this issue in Brazilian courts.
At the time of writing, Cresud owns a 34.2% controlling stake in BrasilAgro, and public documents and presentations by Cresud show that it considers BrasilAgro to be part of the same company. Cresud’s top team (including their CEO and Chairman) sit on BrasilAgro’s board.
Methodology: How we define and measure deforestation
According to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), deforestation is defined as “the conversion of forested areas to non-forest land use such as arable land, urban use, logged area or wasteland. Deforestation is the conversion of forest to another land use or the long-term reduction of tree canopy cover below the 10% threshold.”
In this report, Global Witness uses the FAO’s definition of deforestation when analysing evidence of land clearance via satellite imagery. This is standard practice but Global Witness acknowledges, however, that using satellite imagery is not infallible and that resulting calculations contain small but unavoidable margins of error.
The figures are inferences based on satellite imagery, rather than built on extensive examination of every hectare of deforestation on the ground. Global Witness assesses that there is a high degree of likelihood of deforestation in that area, rather than deforestation being a certainty.
For this report’s analysis, Global used public information shared by Cresud and information from the Brazilian land registry in order to create a shapefile of Cresud’s entire farm portfolio and then compared this with evidence of land clearance on these properties.
For a detailed explanation of Global Witness’ deforestation analysis in this report, please download this investigation's methodology document.
