We can get our arms around a hundred companies. The rest of the land can be used for something else. We can do more, for sure, but better is better. Next in the series is my conversation with Jason Clay, Senior Vice President, Market Transformation for. The projections are that by 2050 we will have 9+ billion and they will consume twice as much per capita. This land sharing approach could then ideally be used to foster biodiversity conservation and rural livelihood enhancement. Where on any given plantation, 20% of the trees produce 80% of the crop, Mars could be now looking at plants that could produce 320% as much cocoa on 40% of the land.
Should the conservation movement even engage with economic markets? And what they see is that they need to improve chocolate production. If you take a look just at water, what we see is that, with four very common products, you look at how much a farmer produced to make those products, and then you look at how much water input was put into them, and then you look at what the farmer was paid. Whatever was sustainable on a planet of six billion is not going to be sustainable on a planet with nine. We were attacking the wrong driver. We can't just focus on identifying the best; we've got to move the rest. Such an approach drives change for both the environment and the private sector. That gets your adrenaline going.
So we did the analysis again a slightly different way. From a greenhouse gas perspective, is lamb produced in the U. If they don't have commodities, they don't have a business. I assessed how long they were going to stay and how much it would take to feed them. Now, if you get a Ph. By defining where we want producers to go, we can make more progress getting there.
We need to begin to work with industries. Of course, you get a brand leverage as well. We need Cargill to work with Bunge. So we're going to have 18 billion units of consumption. Hi, here are some summarizing thoughts: Caution is warranted for any company claiming to do something regardless if its a 'hybrid' business or not.
We need Coke to work with Pepsi. The single largest source of deforestation comes from food and fiber — in fact, four crops beef, soy, palm oil and pulp in four countries are responsible for half of deforestation globally. This set us on the path we are on today, but by no means were they the first to use their profit for good. A hundred companies, we can work with. By 2050, we're going to have nine billion people -- all the scientists agree. In my case the achievement of the social mission is the driver of the revenue.
We've got to wake up to the fact that we don't have any more and that this is a finite planet. We need to use less to make more. Eight entities came to the table. Companies have been operating under the model using profits for good as a percentage of profit for some time. So it's the demand that brings them to the table.
We have to really begin to change the way we think about everything. The zero conditional is used for when the time being referred to is now or always and the situation is real and possible. Is a bad feeder lot operation for beef better or worse than a bad grazing operation for beef? We can get our arms around a hundred companies. We had 15 to 20, maybe 22 percent of the global Brazil-nut market. The study shows that the highest net present value for palm oil is on land that's been degraded. We have to save these places if we want a chance in hell of preserving biodiversity as we know it. However, I would be hesitant to consider the increasing 'conscious market' just a fad.
Try making a sentence with each type of conditional. We needed to be working on soy -- things that we were not focused on. If we work with those, if we change those companies and the way they do business, then the rest will happen automatically. This is where we stand today. So I was at a Grateful Dead benefit concert on the rainforests in 1988. We need Cargill to work with Bunge. For bankers, we'd be living off the principal, not the interest.