Biodiversity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some of the biodiversity of a coral reef

Rainforests are an example of biodiversity on the planet, and typically possess a great deal of species diversity. This is the Gambia River in Senegal's Niokolo-Koba National Park.

Biodiversity is the degree of variation of life forms within a given ecosystem, biome, or an entire planet. Biodiversity is a measure of the health of ecosystems. Greater biodiversity implies greater health. Biodiversity

is in part a function of climate. In terrestrial habitats, tropical regions are typically rich whereas polar regions support fewer species. Rapid environmental changes typically cause mass extinctions. One estimate is that less than 1% of the species that have existed on Earth are extant.[1] Since life began on Earth, five major mass extinctions and several minor events have led to large and sudden drops in biodiversity. The Phanerozoic eon (the last 540 million years) marked a rapid growth in biodiversity via the Cambrian explosiona period during which nearly every phylum of multicellular organisms first appeared. The next 400 million years included repeated, massive biodiversity losses classified as mass extinction events. In the Carboniferous, rainforest collapse led to a great loss of plant and animal life.[2] The PermianTriassic extinction event, 251 million years ago, was the worst; vertebrate recovery took 30 million years.[3] The most recent, the CretaceousTertiary extinction event, occurred 65 million years ago, and has often attracted more attention than others because it resulted in the extinction of the dinosaurs.[4] The period since the emergence of humans has displayed an ongoing biodiversity reduction and an accompanying loss of genetic diversity. Named the Holocene extinction, the reduction is caused primarily by human impacts, particularly habitat destruction. Conversely, biodiversity impacts human health in a number of ways, both positively and negatively.[5] The United Nations designated 2011-2020 as the United Nations Decade on Biodiversity.
Contents
[hide]

o o o o o o o o

1 Etymology 2 Definitions 3 Distribution 3.1 Latitudinal gradients 3.2 Hotspots 4 Evolution 4.1 Evolutionary diversification 5 Human benefits 5.1 Agriculture 5.2 Human health 5.3 Business and industry 5.4 Leisure, cultural and aesthetic value 5.5 Ecological services

 o o

6 Number of species 7 Species loss rates 8 Threats 8.1 Habitat destruction 8.2 Introduced and invasive species

o o

8.2.1 Genetic pollution 8.3 Overexploitation 8.4 Hybridization, genetic

pollution/erosion and food security

o o o o o o o o

8.5 Climate Change 8.6 Overpopulation 9 The Holocene extinction 10 Conservation 11 Protection and restoration techniques 11.1 Resource allocation 12 Legal status 13 Analytical limits 13.1 Taxonomic and size relationships 14 See also 15 References 16 Further reading 17 External links 17.1 Documents 17.2 Tools 17.3 Training material 17.4 Resources

[edit]Etymology
The term biological diversity was used first by wildlife scientist and conservationist Raymond F. Dasmann in the 1968 lay book A Different Kind of Country[6] advocating conservation. The term was widely adopted only after more than a decade, when in the 1980s it came into common usage in science and environmental policy. Thomas Lovejoy, in the foreword to the bookConservation Biology,[7] introduced the term to the scientific community. Until then the term "natural diversity" was common, introduced by The Science Division of The

Nature Conservancy in an important 1975 study, "The Preservation of Natural Diversity." By the early 1980s TNC's Science program and its head, Robert E. Jenkins,[8] Lovejoy and other leading conservation scientists at the time in America advocated the use of "biological diversity". The term's contracted form biodiversity may have been coined by W.G. Rosen in 1985 while planning the 1986 National Forum on Biological Diversity organized by the National Research Council (NRC). It first appeared in a publication in 1988 when entomologist E. O. Wilson used it as the title of the proceedings[9] of that forum.[10] Since this period the term has achieved widespread use among biologists, environmentalists, political leaders, and concerned citizens. A similar term in the United States is "natural heritage." It predates the others and is more accepted by the wider audience interested in conservation. Broader than biodiversity, it includes geology and landforms (geodiversity).

[edit]Definitions

A sampling of fungi collected during summer 2008 in Northern Saskatchewan mixed woods, near LaRonge is an example regarding the species diversity of fungi. In this photo, there are also leaflichens and mosses.

"Biological diversity" or "biodiversity" can have many interpretations. It is most commonly used to replace the more clearly defined and long established terms, species diversity and species richness. Biologists most often

define biodiversity as the "totality of genes, species, and ecosystems of a region".[11][12] An advantage of this definition is that it seems to describe most circumstances and presents a unified view of the traditional three levels at which biological variety has been identified:

species diversity ecosystem diversity genetic diversity

In 2003 Professor Anthony Campbell at Cardiff University, UK and the Darwin Centre, Pembrokeshire, defined a fourth level: Molecular Diversity.[13] This multilevel construct is consistent with Dasmann and Lovejoy. An explicit definition consistent with this interpretation was first given in a paper by Bruce A. Wilcox commissioned by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) for the 1982 World National Parks Conference.
[14]

Wilcox's definition was "Biological diversity is the variety of life forms...at all levels of biological systems (i.e.,

molecular, organismic, population, species and ecosystem)...". The 1992 United Nations Earth Summit defined "biological diversity" as "the variability among living organisms from all sources, including, 'inter alia', terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic ecosystems, and the ecological complexes of which they are part: this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems".[15] This definition is used in the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.[15] One textbook's definition is "variation of life at all levels of biological organization".[16] Geneticists define it as the diversity of genes and organisms. They study processes such as mutations, gene transfer, and genome dynamics that generate evolution.[14] Measuring diversity at one level in a group of organisms may not precisely correspond to diversity at other levels. However, tetrapod(terrestrial vertebrates) taxonomic and ecological diversity shows a very close correlation.[17]

[edit]Distribution

A conifer forest in the Swiss Alps (National Park).

Biodiversity is not evenly distributed, rather it varies greatly across the globe as well as within regions. Among other factors, the diversity of all living things (biota) depends on temperature, precipitation, altitude, soils, geography and the presence of other species. Diversity consistently measures higher in the tropics and in other localized regions such as Cape Floristic Province and lower in polar regions generally. In 2006 many species were formally classified as rare or endangered or threatened; moreover, scientists have estimated that millions more species are at risk which have not been formally recognized. About 40 percent of the 40,177 species assessed using the IUCN Red List criteria are now listed as threatened with extinctiona total of 16,119.[18] Generally terrestrial biodiversity is up to 25 times greater than ocean biodiversity.[19]

[edit]Latitudinal

gradients

Main article: Latitudinal gradients in species diversity Generally, there is an increase in biodiversity from the poles to the tropics. Thus localities at lower latitudes have more species than localities at higher latitudes. This is often referred to as the latitudinal gradient in species diversity. Several ecological mechanisms may contribute to the gradient, but the ultimate factor behind many of them is the greater mean temperature at the equator compared to that of the poles.[20][21] Even though terrestrial biodiversity declines from the equator to the poles,[22] some studies claim that this characteristic is unverified in aquatic ecosystems, especially in marine ecosystems.[23] The latitudinal distribution of parasites does not follow this rule.[24] Other instances of great diversity in higher latitudes have also been recorded.[citation needed]

[edit]Hotspots
A biodiversity hotspot is a region with a high level of endemic species. Hotspots were first named in 1988 by Dr. Norman Myers.[25][26] Many hotspots have large nearby human populations.[27] While hotspots are spread all over the world, the majority are forest areas and most are located in the tropics.[28] Brazil's Atlantic Forest is considered one such hotspot, containing roughly 20,000 plant species, 1,350 vertebrates, and millions of insects, about half of which occur nowhere else. The island of Madagascar, particularly the unique Madagascar dry deciduous forests and lowland rainforests, possess a high ratio of endemism. Since the island separated from mainlandAfrica 65 million years ago, many species and ecosystems have evolved independently. Indonesia's 17,000 islands cover 735,355 square miles (1,904,560 km2) contain 10% of the world's flowering plants, 12% of mammals and 17% of reptiles, amphibians and birds along with nearly 240 million people.[29] Many regions of high biodiversity and/or endemism arise from specialized habitats which require unusual adaptations, for example alpine environments in high mountains, or Northern European peat bogs. Accurately measuring differences in biodiversity can be difficult. Selection bias amongst researchers may contribute to biased empirical research for modern estimates of biodiversity. In 1768 Rev. Gilbert White succinctly observed of his Selborne, Hampshire "all nature is so full, that that district produces the most variety which is the most examined."[30]

[edit]Evolution
Main article: Evolution

Apparent marine fossil diversity during the Phanerozoic[31]

Biodiversity is the result of 3.5 billion years of evolution. The origin of life has not been definitely established by science, however some evidence suggests that life may already have been well-established only a few

hundred million years after the formation of the Earth. Until approximately 600 million years ago, all life consisted of archaea, bacteria, protozoans and similar single-celled organisms. The history of biodiversity during the Phanerozoic (the last 540 million years), starts with rapid growth during the Cambrian explosiona period during which nearly every phylum of multicellular organisms first appeared. Over the next 400 million years or so, invertebrate diversity showed little overall trend, and vertebrate diversity shows an overall exponential trend.[17] This dramatic rise in diversity was marked by periodic, massive losses of diversity classified as mass extinction events.[17] A significant loss occurred when rainforests collapsed in the carboniferous.[2] The worst was the Permo-Triassic extinction, 251 million years ago. Vertebrates took 30 million years to recover from this event.[3] The fossil record suggests that the last few million years featured the greatest biodiversity in history.
[17]

However, not all scientists support this view, since there is uncertainty as to how strongly the fossil record is

biased by the greater availability and preservation of recent geologic sections. Some scientists believe that corrected for sampling artifacts, modern biodiversity may not be much different from biodiversity 300 million years ago.[32], whereas others consider the fossil record reasonably reflective of the diversification of life.
[17]

Estimates of the present global macroscopic species diversity vary from 2 million to 100 million, with a best

estimate of somewhere near 1314 million, the vast majority arthropods.[33] Diversity appears to increase continually in the absence of natural selection.[34]

[edit]Evolutionary

diversification

The existence of a "global carrying capacity", limiting the amount of life that can live at once, is debated, as is the question of whether such a limit would also cap the number of species. While records of life in the sea shows a logistic pattern of growth, life on land (insects, plants and tetrapods)shows an exponential rise in diversity. As one author states, "Tetrapods have not yet invaded 64 per cent of potentially habitable modes, and it could be that without human influence the ecological and taxonomic diversity of tetrapods would continue to increase in an exponential fashion until most or all of the available ecospace is filled."[17] On the other hand, changes through the Phanerozoic correlate much better with the hyperbolic model (widely used in population biology, demography and macrosociology, as well asfossil biodiversity) than with exponential and logistic models. The latter models imply that changes in diversity are guided by a firstorder positive feedback (more ancestors, more descendants) and/or a negative feedback arising from resource limitation. Hyperbolic model implies a second-order positive feedback. The hyperbolic pattern of the world populationgrowth arises from a second-order positive feedback between the population size and the rate of technological growth.[35] The hyperbolic character of biodiversity growth can be similarly accounted for by a feedback between diversity and community structure complexity. The similarity between the curves of biodiversity and human population probably comes from the fact that both are derived from the interference of the hyperbolic trend with cyclical and stochastic dynamics.[35][36]

Most biologists agree however that the period since human emergence is part of a new mass extinction, named the Holocene extinction event, caused primarily by the impact humans are having on the environment.[37] It has been argued that the present rate of extinction is sufficient to eliminate most species on the planet Earth within 100 years.[38] New species are regularly discovered (on average between 510,000 new species each year, most of them insects) and many, though discovered, are not yet classified (estimates are that nearly 90% of all arthropods are not yet classified).[33] Most of the terrestrial diversity is found in tropical forests.

[edit]Human

benefits

Summer field in Belgium (Hamois). The blue flowers are Centaurea cyanus and the red are Papaver rhoeas.

Biodiversity supports ecosystem services including air quality,[39] climate (e.g., CO2 sequestration), water purification, pollination, and prevention of erosion.[39] Since the stone age, species loss has accelerated above the prior rate, driven by human activity. Estimates of species loss are at a rate 100-10,000 times as fast as is typical in the fossil record.[40] Non-material benefits include spiritual and aesthetic values, knowledge systems and the value of education.[40]

[edit]Agriculture
See also: Agricultural biodiversity

Amazon Rainforest in Brazil.

The reservoir of genetic traits present in wild varieties and traditionally grown landracesis extremely important in improving crop performance.[citation needed] Important crops, such as potato, banana and coffee, are often derived from only a few genetic strains.[citation needed] Improvements in crop species over the last 250 years have been largely due to incorporating genes from wild varieties and species into cultivars.[citation needed] Crop breeding for beneficial traits has helped to more than double crop production in the last 50 years as a result of the Green Revolution. A biodiverse environment preserves the genome from which such productive genes are drawn.
[citation needed]

Crop diversity aids recovery when the dominant cultivar is attacked by a disease or predator:

The Irish potato blight of 1846 was a major factor in the deaths of one million people and the

emigration of another million. It was the result of planting only two potato varieties, both vulnerable to the blight.

When rice grassy stunt virus struck rice fields from Indonesia to India in the 1970s, 6,273 varieties

were tested for resistance.[41] Only one was resistant, an Indian variety, and known to science only since 1966.[41] This variety formed a hybrid with other varieties and is now widely grown.[41]

Coffee rust attacked coffee plantations in Sri Lanka, Brazil, and Central America in 1970. A resistant

variety was found in Ethiopia.[42] Although the diseases are themselves a form of biodiversity. Monoculture was a contributing factor to several agricultural disasters, including the European wine industry collapse in the late 19th century, and the US Southern Corn Leaf Blightepidemic of 1970.[43] Although about 80 percent of humans' food supply comes from just 20 kinds of plants,[citation needed] humans use at least 40,000 species.[citation needed] Many people depend on these species for food, shelter, and clothing.[citation
needed]

Earth's surviving biodiversity provides resources for increasing the range of food and other products

suitable for human use, although the present extinction rate shrinks that potential.[38]

[edit]Human

health

The diverse forest canopy onBarro Colorado Island, Panama, yielded this display of different fruit

Biodiversity's relevance to human health is becoming an international political issue, as scientific evidence builds on the global health implications of biodiversity loss.[44][45][46] This issue is closely linked with the issue of climate change,[47] as many of the anticipated health risks of climate change are associated with changes in biodiversity (e.g. changes in populations and distribution of disease vectors, scarcity of fresh water, impacts on agricultural biodiversity and food resources etc.) Some of the health issues influenced by biodiversity include dietary health and nutrition security, infectious disease, medical science and medicinal resources, social and psychological health.[48] Biodiversity is also known to have an important role in reducing disaster risk, and in post-disaster relief and recovery efforts.[49][50] Biodiversity provides critical support for drug discovery and the availability of medicinal resources.[51] A significant proportion of drugs are derived, directly or indirectly, from biological sources: at least 50% of the pharmaceutical compounds on the US market are derived from plants, animals, andmicro-organisms, while about 80% of the world population depends on medicines from nature (used in either modern or traditional medical practice) for primary healthcare.[45] Only a tiny fraction of wild species has been investigated for medical potential. Biodiversity has been critical to advances throughout the field of bionics. Evidence from market analysis and biodiversity science indicates that the decline in output from the pharmaceutical sector since the mid-1980s can be attributed to a move away from natural product exploration ("bioprospecting") in favor of genomics and synthetic chemistry; meanwhile, natural products have a long history of supporting significant economic and health innovation.[52][53] Marine ecosystems are particularly important,[54] although inappropriate bioprospecting can increase biodiversity loss, as well as violating the laws of the communities

and states from which the resources are taken.[55][56][57] Higher biodiversity also limits the spread of infectious diseases as many different species act as buffers to them.[58]

[edit]Business

and industry

Agriculture production, pictured is atractor and a chaser bin

Many industrial materials derive directly from biological sources. These include building materials, fibers, dyes, rubber and oil. Biodiversity is also important to the security of resources such as water, timber, paper, fiber, and food.[59][60][61] As a result, biodiversity loss is a significant risk factor in business development and a threat to long term economic sustainability.[62]

[edit]Leisure,

cultural and aesthetic value

Biodiversity enriches leisure activities such as hiking, birdwatching or natural history study. Biodiversity inspires musicians, painters, sculptors, writers and other artists. Many cultures view themselves as an integral part of the natural world which requires them to respect other living organisms. Popular activities such as gardening, fishkeeping and specimen collecting strongly depend on biodiversity. The number of species involved in such pursuits is in the tens of thousands, though the majority do not enter commerce. The relationships between the original natural areas of these often exotic animals and plants and commercial collectors, suppliers, breeders, propagators and those who promote their understanding and enjoyment are complex and poorly understood. The general public responds well to exposure to rare and unusual organisms, reflecting their inherent value. Philosophically it could be argued that biodiversity has intrinsic aesthetic and spiritual value to mankind in and of itself. This idea can be used as a counterweight to the notion thattropical forests and other ecological realms are only worthy of conservation because of the services they provide.[citation needed]

[edit]Ecological

services

See also: Ecological effects of biodiversity

Eagle Creek, Oregon hiking No longer do we have to justify the existence of humid tropical forests on the feeble grounds that they might carry plants with with drugs that cure human disease. Gaia theory forces us to see that they offer much more than this. Through their capacity to evapotranspirate vast volumes of water vapor, they serve to keep the planet cool by wearing a sunshade of white reflecting cloud. Their replacement by cropland could precipitate a disaster that is global in scale James Lovelock, in Biodiversity (E. O. Wilson (Ed)).[63]

Biodiversity supports many ecosystem services that are often not readily visible. It plays a part in regulating the chemistry of our atmosphere andwater supply. Biodiversity is directly involved in water purification, recycling nutrients and providing fertile soils. Experiments with controlled environments have shown that humans cannot easily build ecosystems to support human needs; for example insect pollination cannot be mimicked, and that activity alone represents tens of billions of dollars in ecosystem services per year to humankind.[citation needed] Daisyworld simulations, supported by evidence from scientific studies, has proven the positive co-relation of biodiversity with ecosystem stability, protecting against disruption by extreme weather or human exploitation.[64]

[edit]Number

of species

Main article: Species

Undiscovered and discovered species

According to the Global Taxonomy Initiative[65] and the European Distributed Institute of Taxonomy, the total number of species for some phyla may be much higher than what was known in 2010:

1030 million insects;[66] (of some 0.9 million we know today)[67] 510 million bacteria;[68] 1.5 million fungi;(of some 0.075 million we know today)[69] 1 million mites[70] The number of microbial species is not reliably known, but the Global Ocean Sampling

Expedition dramatically increased the estimates of genetic diversity by identifying an enormous number of new genes from near-surface plankton samples at various marine locations, initially over the 2004-2006 period.[71] The findings may eventually cause a significant change in the way science defines species and other taxonomic categories.[72][73] Since the rate of extinction has increased, many extant species may become extinct before they are described.
[74]

[edit]Species

loss rates

During the last century, decreases in biodiversity have been increasingly observed. In 2007, German Federal Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel cited estimates that up to 30% of all species will be extinct by 2050.[75] Of these, about one eighth of known plant species are threatened with extinction.[76] Estimates reach as high as 140,000 species per year (based onSpecies-area theory).[77] This figure indicates unsustainable ecological practices, because few species emerge each year.[citation needed] Almost all scientists acknowledge that the rate of species loss is greater now than at any time in human history, with extinctions occurring at rates hundreds of times higher than background extinction rates.[76]

[edit]Threats
Jared Diamond describes an "Evil Quartet" of habitat destruction, overkill, introduced species, and secondary extinctions.[78] Edward O. Wilson prefers the acronym HIPPO, standing for habitat destruction, invasive species, pollution, human over population, and over-harvesting.[79][80] The most authoritative classification in use today is IUCNs Classification of Direct Threats[81] which has been adopted by major international conservation organizations such as the US Nature Conservancy, the World Wildlife Fund, Conservation International, andBirdlife International.

[edit]Habitat

destruction

Deforestation and increased road-building in the Amazon Rainforest are a significant concern because of increased human encroachment upon wild areas, increased resource extraction and further threats to biodiversity.

Main article: Habitat destruction Habitat destruction has played a key role in extinctions, especially related to tropical forest destruction.
[82]

Factors contributing to habitat loss are: overpopulation, deforestation,[83] pollution (air pollution, water

pollution, soil contamination) and global warming or climate change.[citation needed] Habitat size and numbers of species are systematically related. Physically larger species and those living at lower latitudes or in forests or oceans are more sensitive to reduction in habitat area.[84] Conversion to "trivial" standardized ecosystems (e.g., monoculture followingdeforestation) effectively destroys habitat for the more

diverse species that preceded the conversion. In some countries lack of property rights or lax law/regulatory enforcement necessarily leads to biodiversity loss (degradation costs having to be supported by the community).[citation needed] A 2007 study conducted by the National Science Foundation found that biodiversity and genetic diversity are codependentthat diversity among species requires diversity within a species, and vice versa. "If any one type is removed from the system, the cycle can break down, and the community becomes dominated by a single species."[85] At present, the most threatened ecosystems are found in fresh water, according to theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005, which was confirmed by the "Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment", organised by the biodiversity platform, and the French Institut de recherche pour le dveloppement (MNHNP).
[86]

Co-extinctions are a form of habitat destruction. Co-extinction occurs when the extinction or decline in one accompanies the other, such as in plants and beetles.[87]

[edit]Introduced

and invasive species

Main articles: Introduced species and Invasive species

This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2011)

Male Lophura nycthemera(Silver Pheasant), a native of East Asia that has been introduced into parts of Europe for ornamental reasons

Barriers such as large rivers, seas, oceans, mountains and deserts encourage diversity by enabling independent evolution on either side of the barrier.Invasive species occur when those barriers are blurred. Without barriers such species occupy new niches, substantially reducing diversity. Repeatedly humans have helped these species circumvent these barriers, introducing them for food and other purposes. This has occurred on a time scale much shorter than the eons that historically have been required for a species to extend its range.

Not all introduced species are invasive, nor all invasive species deliberately introduced. In cases such as the zebra mussel, invasion of US waterways was unintentional. In other cases, such as mongooses in Hawaii, the introduction is deliberate but ineffective (nocturnal rats were not vulnerable to thediurnal mongoose). In other cases, such as oil palms in Indonesia and Malaysia, the introduction produces substantial economic benefits, but the benefits are accompanied by costly unintended consequences. Finally, an introduced species may unintentionally injure a species that depends on the species it replaces. In Belgium, Prunus spinosa from Eastern Europe leafs much sooner than its West European counterparts, disrupting the feeding habits of the Thecla betulae butterfly (which feeds on the leaves). Introducing new species often leaves endemic and other local species unable to compete with the exotic species and unable to survive. The exotic organisms may be predators, parasites, or may simply outcompete indigenous species for nutrients, water and light. At present, several countries have already imported so many exotic species, particularly agricultural and ornamental plants, that the own indigenous fauna/flora may be outnumbered.

[edit]Genetic pollution
Main article: Genetic pollution Endemic species can be threatened with extinction[88] through the process of genetic pollution, i.e. uncontrolled hybridization, introgression and genetic swamping. Genetic pollution leads to homogenization or replacement of local genomes as a result of either a numerical and/or fitness advantage of an introduced species.[89] Hybridization and introgression are side-effects of introduction and invasion. These phenomena can be especially detrimental to rare species that come into contact with more abundant ones. The abundant species can interbreed with the rare species, swamping its gene pool. This problem is not always apparent from morphological (outward appearance) observations alone. Some degree of gene flowisnormal adaptation, and not all gene and genotype constellations can be preserved. However, hybridization with or without introgression may, nevertheless, threaten a rare species' existence.[90][91]

[edit]Overexploitation
Main article: Overexploitation Overexploitation occurs when a resource is consumed at an unsustainable rate. This occurs on land in the form of overhunting, excessive logging, poor soil conservation in agriculture and the illegal wildlife trade. Joe Walston, director of the Wildlife Conservation Societys Asian programs, called the latter the "single largest threat" to biodiversity in Asia.[92] The international trade of endangered species is second in size only to drug trafficking.[93]

About 25% of world fisheries are now overfished to the point where their current biomass is less than the level that maximizes their sustainable yield.[94] The overkill hypothesis explains why earlier megafaunal extinctions occurred within a relatively short period of time. This can be connected with human migration.[95]

[edit]Hybridization,

genetic pollution/erosion and food security

The Yecoro wheat (right) cultivar is sensitive to salinity, plants resulting from a hybrid cross with cultivar W4910 (left) show greater tolerance to high salinity

See also: Food Security and Genetic erosion In agriculture and animal husbandry, the Green Revolution popularized the use of conventional hybridization to increase yield. Often hybridized breeds originated in developed countries and were further hybridized with local varieties in the developing world to create high yield strains resistant to local climate and diseases. Local governments and industry have been pushing hybridization. Formerly huge gene pools of various wild and indigenous breeds have collapsed causing widespread genetic erosion and genetic pollution. This has resulted in loss of genetic diversity and biodiversity as a whole.[96] (GM organisms) have genetic material altered by genetic engineering procedures such as recombinant DNA technology. GM crops have become a common source for genetic pollution, not only of wild varieties but also of domesticated varieties derived from classical hybridization.[97][98][99][100][101] Genetic erosion coupled with genetic pollution may be destroying unique genotypes, thereby creating a hidden crisis which could result in a severe threat to our food security. Diverse genetic material could cease to exist which would impact our ability to further hybridize food crops and livestock against more resistant diseases and climatic changes.[96]

[edit]Climate

Change

Main article: Effect of Climate Change on Plant Biodiversity

Polar bears on the sea ice of the Arctic Ocean, near the North Pole. Climate change has started affecting bear populations.

Global warming is also considered to be a major threat to global biodiversity.[citation needed] For example coral reefs -which are biodiversity hotspots- will be lost in 20 to 40 years if global warming continues at the current trend.
[102]

In 2004, an international collaborative study on four continents estimated that 10 percent of species would become extinct by 2050 because of global warming. "We need to limit climate change or we wind up with a lot of species in trouble, possibly extinct," said Dr. Lee Hannah, a co-author of the paper and chief climate change biologist at the Center for Applied Biodiversity Science at Conservation International.[103]

[edit]Overpopulation
From 1950 to 2005, world population increased from 2.5 billion to 6.5 billion and is forecast to reach a plateau of more than 9 billion during the 21st century.[104] Sir David King, former chief scientific adviser to the UK government, told a parliamentary inquiry: "It is self-evident that the massive growth in the human population through the 20th century has had more impact on biodiversity than any other single factor."[105][106]

[edit]The

Holocene extinction

Rates of decline in biodiversity in this sixth mass extinction match or exceed rates of loss in the five previous mass extinction events in the fossil record.[107][108][109][110][111] Loss of biodiversity results in the loss of natural capital that supplies ecosystem goods and services. The economic value of 17 ecosystem services for Earth's biosphere (calculated in 1997) has an estimated value of US$ 33 trillion (3.3x1013) per year.[112]

[edit]Conservation
Main article: Conservation biology

A schematic image illustrating the relationship between biodiversity, ecosystem services, human well-being, and poverty.
[113]

The illustration shows where conservation action, strategies and plans can influence the drivers of the current

biodiversity crisis at local, regional, to global scales.

The retreat of Aletsch Glacier in the Swiss Alps (situation in 1979, 1991 and 2002), due to global warming.

Conservation biology matured in the mid-20th century as ecologists, naturalists, and other scientists began to research and address issues pertaining to global biodiversity declines.[114][115][116] The conservation ethic advocates management of natural resources for the purpose of sustaining biodiversity in species, ecosystems, theevolutionary process, and human culture and society.[107][114][116][117][118] Conservation biology is reforming around strategic plans to protect biodiversity.[114][119][120] Preserving global biodiversity is a priority in strategic conservation plans that are designed to engage public policy and concerns affecting local, regional and global scales of communities, ecosystems, and cultures.[121] Action plans identify ways of sustaining human well-being, employing natural capital, market capital, andecosystem services.[122][123]

[edit]Protection

and restoration techniques

Exotic species removal allows less competitive species to recover their ecological niches. Exotic species that have become a pest can be identified taxonomically (e.g. with Digital Automated Identification SYstem (DAISY), using the barcode of life.[124][125] Removal is practical only given large groups of individuals due to the econimic cost. Once the preservation of the remaining native species in an area is assured. "missing" species can be identified and reintroduced using databases such as the Encyclopedia of Life and the Global Biodiversity Information Facility.

Biodiversity banking places a monetary value on biodiversity. One example is the Australian Native

Vegetation Management Framework.

Gene banks are collections of specimens and genetic material. Some banks intend to reintroduce

banked species to the ecosystem (e.g. via tree nurseries).[126]

Reducing and better targeting of pesticides allows more species to survive in agricultural and

urbanized areas.

Location-specific approaches are less useful for protecting migratory species. One approach is to

create wildlife corridors that correspond to the animals' movements. National and other boundaries can complicate corridor creation.[citation needed]

[edit]Resource

allocation

Focusing on limited areas of higher potential biodiversity promises greater immediate return on investment than spreading resources evenly or focusing on areas of little diversity but greater interest in biodiversity. A second strategy focuses on areas that retain most of their original diversity, which typically require little or no restoration. These are typically non-urbanized, non-agricultural areas. Tropical areas often fit both criteria, given their natively high diversity and relative lack of development.[127]

[edit]Legal

status

A great deal of work is occurring to preserve the natural characteristics of Hopetoun Falls, Australia while continuing to allow visitor access.

Biodiversity is taken into account in some political and judicial decisions:

The relationship between law and ecosystems is very ancient and has consequences for biodiversity.

It is related to private and public property rights. It can define protection for threatened ecosystems, but also some rights and duties (for example,fishing and hunting rights).[citation needed]

Law regarding species is more recent. It defines species that must be protected because they may be

threatened by extinction. The U.S. Endangered Species Act is an example of an attempt to address the "law and species" issue.

Laws regarding gene pools are only about a century old.[citation needed] Domestication and plant breeding

methods are not new, but advances in genetic engineering has led to tighter laws covering distribution of genetically modified organisms, genepatents and process patents.[128] Governments struggle to decide whether to focus on for example, genes, genomes, or organisms and species.[citation needed] Global agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity), give "sovereign national rights over biological resources" (not property). The agreements commit countries to "conserve biodiversity", "develop resources for sustainability" and "share the benefits" resulting from their use. Biodiverse countries that allow bioprospecting or collection of natural products, expect a share of the benefits rather than allowing the individual or institution that discovers/exploits the resource to capture them privately. Bioprospecting can become a type of biopiracy when such principles are not respected.[citation needed] Sovereignty principles can rely upon what is better known as Access and Benefit Sharing Agreements (ABAs). The Convention on Biodiversity implies informed consent between the source country and the collector, to establish which resource will be used and for what, and to settle on a fair agreement on benefit sharing. Uniform approval for use of biodiversity as a legal standard has not been achieved, however. Bosselman argues that biodiversity should not be used as a legal standard, claiming that the remaining areas of scientific uncertainty cause unacceptable administrative waste and increase litigation without promoting preservation goals.[129]

[edit]Analytical [edit]Taxonomic

limits
and size relationships

Less than 1% of all species that have been described have been studied beyond simply noting their existence.
[130]

The vast majority of Earth's species are microbial. Contemporary biodiversity physics is "firmly fixated on

the visible [macroscopic] world".[131] For example, microbial life is metabolically and environmentally more diverse than multicellular life (see e.g.,extremophile). "On the tree of life, based on analyses of smallsubunit ribosomal RNA, visible life consists of barely noticeable twigs. The inverse relationship of size and population recurs higher on the evolutionary ladder"to a first approximation, all multicellular species on Earth are insects".[132] Insect extinction rates are highsupporting the Holocene extinction hypothesis.[133][134]

[edit]See

also
Global Biodiversity Information Facility Gene pool Genetic erosion Genetic pollution Global 200 Global warming Green Revolution Habitat conservation Habitat fragmentation Holistic management Holocene extinction event Insect biodiversity International Day for Biological Diversity Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis International Institute of Tropical Agriculture International Treaty on Plant Genetic

2011-2020 UN Decade on Biodiversity 2010 Biodiversity Indicators Partnership 2010 International Year of Biodiversity Adaptation Agroecological restoration Agricultural biodiversity Amazonian forest Applied ecology Biocomplexity Biodiversity banking Biodiversity hotspot Biodiversity informatics Biogeography Bioinformatics BIOPAT - Patrons for Biodiversity Biorisk BioWeb Canadian Biodiversity Information Network Centres of Plant Diversity Conservation Biology Conservation Commons Conservation ethic Convention on Biological Diversity Diversity index Ecological economics Ecological restoration Extinction

Resources for Food and Agriculture International Union for Conservation of

Nature List of biodiversity databases List of environmental issues List of environmental topics Living Planet Index Megadiverse countries Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Millennium Seed Bank Project

Ecology Ecosystem diversity Ethnic diversity Ewens sampling formula Forest farming

Monoculture Mutation

[edit]References

1. 2.

^ Raup, D. M. (1994). "The role of extinction in evolution". Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences 91: 67586763. doi:10.1073/pnas.91.15.6758. PMC 44280.PMID 8041694. ^ a b Sahney, S., Benton, M.J. & Falcon-Lang, H.J. (2010). "Rainforest collapse triggered

Pennsylvanian tetrapod diversification in Euramerica" (PDF). Geology 38: 1079 1082.doi:10.1130/G31182.1.

3.

^ a b Sahney, S. and Benton, M.J. (2008). "Recovery from the most profound mass extinction of all

time" (PDF). Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological 275 (1636): 759 65. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.1370. PMC 2596898. PMID 18198148.

4.

^ Bambach, R.K.; Knoll, A.H.; Wang, S.C. (December 2004). "Origination, extinction, and mass

depletions of marine diversity". Paleobiology 30 (4): 52242. doi:10.1666/00948373(2004)030<0522:OEAMDO>2.0.CO;2. Retrieved 2008-01-24

5.

^ Sala, Osvaldo E.; Meyerson, Laura A.; Parmesan, Camille (26 January 2009).Biodiversity

change and human health: from ecosystem services to spread of disease. Island Press. pp. 3 5. ISBN 9781597264976. Retrieved 28 June 2011.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

^ Dasmann, R. F. 1968. A Different Kind of Country. MacMillan Company, New York. ISBN 0-02-

072810-7. ^ M. E. Soul and B. A. Wilcox. 1980. Conservation Biology: An Evolutionary-Ecological

Perspective. Sinauer Associates. Sunderland, Massachusetts. ^ Robert E. Jenkins ^ Edward O.Wilson, editor, Frances M.Peter, associate editor, Biodiversity, National Academy

Press, March 1988 ISBN 0-309-03783-2 ; ISBN 0-309-03739-5 (pbk.), online edition ^ Global Biodiversity Assessment. UNEP, 1995, Annex 6, Glossary. ISBN 0-521-56481-6, used as

source by "Biodiversity", Glossary of terms related to the CBD, BelgianClearing-House Mechanism. Retrieved 2006-04-26.

11.

^ Tor-Bjrn Larsson (2001). Biodiversity evaluation tools for European forests. Wiley-Blackwell.

p. 178. ISBN 9788716164346. Retrieved 28 June 2011.

12. 13. 14.

^ Davis. Intro To Env Engg (Sie), 4E. McGraw-Hill Education (India) Pvt Ltd.

pp. 4.ISBN 9780070671171. Retrieved 28 June 2011. ^ Campbell, AK (2003). "Save those molecules: molecular biodiversity and life". Journal of Applied

Ecology 40 (2): 193203. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.2003.00803.x. ^ a b Wilcox, Bruce A. 1984. In situ conservation of genetic resources: determinants of minimum

area requirements. In National Parks, Conservation and Development, Proceedings of the World Congress on National Parks,, J.A. McNeely and K.R. Miller, Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 18-30.

15. 16. 17.

^ a b D. L. Hawksworth (1996). Biodiversity: measurement and estimation. Springer.

p. 6.ISBN 9780412752209. Retrieved 28 June 2011. ^ Kevin J. Gaston & John I. Spicer. 2004. "Biodiversity: an introduction", Blackwell Publishing. 2nd

Ed., ISBN 1-4051-1857-1(pbk.) ^ a b c d e f Sahney, S.; Benton, M.J.; Ferry, Paul (2010). "Links between global taxonomic diversity,

ecological diversity and the expansion of vertebrates on land". Biology Letters(The Royal Society) 6 (4): 5447. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.1024. PMC 2936204.PMID 20106856.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.
2011.

^ "Endangered Species List Expands to 16,000". Retrieved 2007-11-13. ^ Benton M. J. (2001). "Biodiversity on land and in the sea". Geological Journal 36: 211

230. doi:10.1002/gj.877. ^ Currie, D. J., G. G. Mittelbach, H. V. Cornell, D. M. Kaufman, J. T. Kerr, T. Oberdorff, J.-F.

Gugan. 2004. A critical review of species-energy theory. Ecology Letters 7:1121-1134. ^ Allen, A. P., J. F. Gillooly, V. M. Savage, and J. H. Brown. 2006. Kinetic effects of temperature on

rates of genetic divergence and speciation. PNAS 103: 9130-9135. ^ Hillebrand, H. 2004. On the generality of the latitudinal diversity gradient. The American

Naturalist 163:192-211. ^ "Moustakas, A. & I. Karakassis. How diverse is aquatic biodiversity research?, Aquatic Ecology,

39, 367-375" (PDF). ^ Serge Morand; Boris R. Krasnov (1 September 2010). The Biogeography of Host-Parasite

Interactions. Oxford University Press. pp. 9394. ISBN 9780199561353. Retrieved 28 June 2011. ^ Myers N (1988). "Threatened biotas: 'hot spots' in tropical forests". Environmentalist 8(3): 187

208. doi:10.1007/BF02240252. PMID 12322582. ^ Myers N (1990). "The biodiversity challenge: expanded hot-spots

analysis".Environmentalist 10 (4): 243256. doi:10.1007/BF02239720. PMID 12322583. ^ Jeffrey K. McKee (December 2004). Sparing Nature: The Conflict Between Human Population

Growth and Earth's Biodiversity. Rutgers University Press. p. 108.ISBN 9780813535586. Retrieved 28 June

28. 29.

^ John Francis (1 August 2008). Philosophy Of Mathematics. Global Vision Publishing Ho.

pp. 129. ISBN 9788182202672. Retrieved 28 June 2011. ^ Normile, Dennis (10 September 2010:). "Saving Forests to Save

Biodiversity". Science329 (5997): 12781280. doi:10.1126/science.329.5997.1278. PMID 20829464. Retrieved December, 2010.

30. 31.

^ White, The Natural History of Selborne, letter xx 8 October 1768. ^ Rosing, M.; Bird, D.; Sleep, N.; Bjerrum, C. (2010). "No climate paradox under the faint early

Sun". Nature 464 (7289): 744 747. Bibcode 2010Natur.464..744R.doi:10.1038/nature08955. PMID 20360739. edit

32.

^ Alroy, J; Marshall, CR; Bambach, RK; Bezusko, K; Foote, M; Fursich, FT; Hansen, TA; Holland,

SM et al. (2001). "Effects of sampling standardization on estimates of Phanerozoic marine diversification". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98 (11): 62616. doi:10.1073/pnas.111144698.PMC 33456. PMID 11353852.

33. 34. 35.

^ a b "Mapping the web of life". Unep.org. Retrieved 2009-06-21. ^ Okasha, S. (2010). "Does diversity always grow?". Nature 466 (7304):

318. Bibcode2010Natur.466..318O. doi:10.1038/466318a. edit ^ a b Markov, AV; Korotaev, AV (2008). "Hyperbolic growth of marine and continental biodiversity

through the phanerozoic and community evolution". Journal of General Biology 69 (3): 175 94. PMID 18677962.

36. 37. 38. 39.

^ Markov, A; Korotayev, A (2007). "Phanerozoic marine biodiversity follows a hyperbolic

trend". Palaeoworld 16 (4): 311318. doi:10.1016/j.palwor.2007.01.002. ^ National Survey Reveals Biodiversity Crisis American Museum of Natural History ^ a b Edward O. Wilson (2002). The Future of Life. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.ISBN 0679450785. ^ a b Costanza, Robert; D'arge, Ralph; De Groot, Rudolf; Farber, Stephen; Grasso, Monica;

Hannon, Bruce; Limburg, Karin; Naeem, Shahid et al. (1997). "The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital". Nature 387 (6630): 253260.doi:10.1038/387253a0.

40.

^ a b Hassan, Rashid M.; Robert Scholes, Neville Ash (2006). Ecosystems and human well-being:

current state and trends : findings of the Condition and Trends Working Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press. p. 105. ISBN 1559632283, 9781559632287.

41. 42.

^ a b c "Rice Grassy Stunt Virus". Lumrix.net. Retrieved 2009-06-21. ^ Wahl, GM; Robert de Saint Vincent B; Derose, ML (1984). "Effect of chromosomal position on

amplification of transfected genes in animal cells". Nature 307 (5951): 516 20.doi:10.1038/307516a0. PMID 6694743.

43.

^ "Southern Corn Leaf Blight". Retrieved 2007-11-13.

44. 45. 46. 47. 48.

^ Reports of the 1st and 2nd International Conferences on Health and Biodiversity. See

also: Website of the UN COHAB Initiative ^ a b Chivian E. & Bernstein A. (eds), 2008. Sustaining Life: How Human Health Depends on

Biodiversity ^ Corvalan C. et al., 2005 Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Health Synthesis. A report of the

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment ^ (2009) "Climate Change and Biological Diversity" Convention on Biological Diversity Retrieved

November 5, 2009, From http://www.cbd.int/climate/ ^ Gaston, Kevin J.; Warren, Philip H.; Devine-Wright, Patrick; Irvine, Katherine N.; Fuller, Richard

A. (2007). "Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity".Biology Letters 3 (4): 390 394. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2007.0149. PMC 2390667.PMID 17504734.

49.
06-21.

^ "COHAB Initiative: Biodiversity and Human Health - the issues". Cohabnet.org. Retrieved 2009-

50. 51. 52. 53.

^ World Wildlife Fund (WWF): "Arguments for Protection" website ^ (2006) "Molecular Pharming" GMO Compass Retrieved November 5, 2009,GMOcompass.org ^ Harvey L., 2008. Natural products in drug discovery. Drug Discovery Today ^ Hawkins E.S., Reich; Reich, MR (1992). "Japanese-originated pharmaceutical products in the

United States from 1960 to 1989: an assessment of innovation". Clin Pharmacol Ther 51 (1): 1 11. doi:10.1038/clpt.1992.1. PMID 1732073.

54. 55. 56. 57. 58.

^ Roopesh, J. et al. (10 February 2008). "Marine organisms: Potential Source for Drug

Discovery" (PDF). Current Science 94 (3): 292. ^ Dhillion, SS; Svarstad, H; Amundsen, C; Bugge, HC (2002). "Bioprospecting: Effects on

environment and development". Ambio 31 (6): 4913. JSTOR 4315292.PMID 12436849. ^ Cole, A. (2005-07-16). "Looking for new compounds in sea is endangering

ecosystem".BMJ 330 (7504): 1350. doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7504.1350-d. ^ "COHAB Initiative - on Natural Products and Medicinal Resources". Cohabnet.org. Retrieved

2009-06-21. ^ Keesing, Felicia; Belden, Lisa K.; Daszak, Peter; Dobson, Andrew; Harvell, C. Drew; Holt, Robert

D.; Hudson, Peter; Jolles, Anna et al. (2010). "Impacts of biodiversity on the emergence and transmission of infectious diseases". Nature 468 (7324): 647652.doi:10.1038/nature09575. PMID 21124449.

59. 60.

^ IUCN, WRI, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Earthwatch Inst.

2007 Business and Ecosystems: Ecosystem Challenges and Business Implications ^ Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005 Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Opportunities and

Challenges for Business and Industry

61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79.

^ "Business and Biodiversity webpage of the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity". Cbd.int.

Retrieved 2009-06-21. ^ WRI Corporate Ecosystem Services Review. See also: Examples of Ecosystem-Service Based

Risks, Opportunities and Strategies ^ Richard E. Leakey; Roger Lewin (4 November 1996). The sixth extinction: biodiversity and its

survival. Phoenix. pp. 137142. ISBN 9781857994735. Retrieved 27 June 2011. ^ James Lovelock (28 September 2000). The ages of Gaia: a biography of our living Earth. Oxford

University Press. pp. 213216. ISBN 9780192862174. Retrieved 27 June 2011. ^ Global taxonomy initiative stating that only 50 of anthropods and 5% of protozoa are already

described ^ "Encyclopedia Smithsonian: Numbers of Insects". Si.edu. Retrieved 2009-06-21. ^ Le Monde newspaper article (in French) ^ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Census of Marine Life

(CoML)News.BBC.co.uk ^ Hawksworth, D (2001). "The magnitude of fungal diversity: The 1.5 million species estimate

revisited". Mycological Research 105 (12): 14221432.doi:10.1017/S0953756201004725. ^ "Acari at University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Web Page". Insects.ummz.lsa.umich.edu.

2003-11-10. Retrieved 2009-06-21. ^ "Fact Sheet - Expedition Overview" (PDF). J. Craig Venter Institute. Retrieved August, 2010. ^ Mirsky, Steve (March 21, 2007). "Naturally Speaking: Finding Nature's Treasure Trove with the

Global Ocean Sampling Expedition". Scientific American. Retrieved 4 May 2011. ^ PLoS Collections: Article collections published by the Public Library of Science ^ McKie, Robin (2005-09-25). "Discovery of new species and extermination at high rate".The

Guardian (London). ^ Gabriel, Sigmar (2007-03-09). "30% of all species lost by 2050". BBC News. ^ a b "Reid Reversing loss of Biodiversity". Ag.arizona.edu. Retrieved 2009-06-21. ^ Pimm, S. L.; Russell, G. J.; Gittleman, J. L.; Brooks, T. M. (1995). "The Future of

Biodiversity" (PDF). Science 269 (5222): 347350.doi:10.1126/science.269.5222.347. PMID 17841251. ^ Sanderson, James; Moulton, Michael (August 18, 1998). Wildlife Issues in a Changing World,

Second Edition [Paperback]. CRC Press. ISBN 978-1566703512. ^ Jim Chen (2003). "Across the Apocalypse on Horseback: Imperfect Legal Responses to

Biodiversity Loss". The Jurisdynamics of Environmental Protection: Change and the Pragmatic. Environmental Law Institute. p. 197. ISBN 1585760714.

80. 81. 82.

6

^ "Hippo dilemma". Windows on the Wild: Science and Sustainabiliy. New Africa Books.

2005. ISBN 1869283805. ^ IUCN's Classification of Direct Threats ^ Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich, Extinction, Random House, New York (1981) ISBN 0-394-51312-

83. 84.

^ C.Michael Hogan. 2010. Deforestation Encyclopedia of Earth. ed. C.Cleveland. NCSE.

Washington DC ^ Drakare, Stina; Lennon, Jack J.; Hillebrand, Helmut (2006). "The imprint of the geographical,

evolutionary and ecological context on species-area relationships". Ecology Letters 9 (2): 215 227. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00848.x. PMID 16958886.

85. 86. 87.

^ "Study: Loss Of Genetic Diversity Threatens Species Diversity". Enn.com. 2007-09-26. Retrieved

2009-06-21. ^ Science Connection 22 (July 2008) ^ Koh L. P., Dunn R. R., Sodhi N. S., Colwell R. K., Proctor H. C., Smith V. S. (2004)."Species

Coextinctions and the Biodiversity Crisis" (PDF). Science 305 (5690): 1632 4.doi:10.1126/science.1101101. PMID 15361627.[dead link]

88. 89.

^ Mooney, H. A. (2001). "The evolutionary impact of invasive species". Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences 98 (10): 54465451. doi:10.1073/pnas.091093398. ^ "Glossary: definitions from the following publication: Aubry, C., R. Shoal and V. Erickson. 2005.

Grass cultivars: their origins, development, and use on national forests and grasslands in the Pacific Northwest. USDA Forest Service. 44 pages, plus appendices.; Native Seed Network (NSN), Institute for Applied Ecology, 563 SW Jefferson Ave, Corvallis, OR 97333, USA". Nativeseednetwork.org. Retrieved 2009-06-21.

90.

^ Rhymer, Judith M.; Simberloff, Daniel (1996). "Extinction by Hybridization and

Introgression". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 27: 83 109.doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.27.1.83. JSTOR 2097230.

91.

^ RIRDC.gov.au, Genetic Pollution from Farm Forestry using!! eucalypt species and hybrids; A

report for the RIRDC/L&WA/FWPRDC; Joint Venture Agroforestry Program; by Brad M. Potts, Robert C. Barbour, Andrew B. Hingston; September 2001; RIRDC Publication No 01/114; RIRDC Project No CPF 3A; ISBN 0-642-58336-6; ISSN 1440-6845; Australian Government, Rural Industrial Research and Development Corporation[dead link]

92. 93.

^ "Restaurants Selling Exotic Meats[dead link]" The New York Times. September 3, 2010 ^ "Will traditional Chinese medicine mean the end of the wild tiger?". San Francisco Chronicle.

November 11, 2007.

94. 95.

^ Grafton, R. Q.; Kompas, T.; Hilborn, R. W. (2007). "Economics of Overexploitation

Revisited". Science 318 (5856): 16011601. doi:10.1126/science.1146017. ^ Burney, D. A.; Flannery, T. F. (July 2005). "Fifty millennia of catastrophic extinctions after human

contact". Trends in Ecology & Evolution (Elsevier) 20 (7): 395 401.doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.04.022. PMID 16701402. Retrieved 2009-06-12.[dead link]

96. 97. 98.

^ a b "Genetic Pollution: The Great Genetic Scandal"; ^ Pollan, Michael (2001-12-09). "The year in ideas: A TO Z.; Genetic Pollution; By Michael Pollan,

The New York Times, December 9, 2001". New York Times. Retrieved 2009-06-21. ^ Ellstrand, Norman C. (2003). Dangerous Liaisons? When Cultivated Plants Mate with Their Wild

Relatives. The Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7405-X.Reviewed in Strauss, Steven H; DiFazio, Stephen P (2004-01-01). "Hybrids abounding".Nature Biotechnology (Nature.com) 22 (1): 29 30. doi:10.1038/nbt0104-29.

99.

^ Zaid, A. et al. (1999). Genetic pollution: Uncontrolled spread of genetic information (frequently

referring to transgenes) into the genomes of organisms in which such genes are not present in nature.. Fao.org. ISBN 92-5-104369-8. Retrieved 2009-06-21.

100. ^ "Genetic pollution: Uncontrolled escape of genetic information (frequently referring to products of
genetic engineering) into the genomes of organisms in the environment where those genes never existed before." Searchable Biotechnology Dictionary[dead link],University of Minnesota, Boku.ac.at

101. ^ "The many facets of pollution". Scienzagiovane.unibo.it (Bologna University). Retrieved 2009-0621.

102. ^ "Coral reefs to be destroyed in 20-40 years". Mnn.com. 2008-12-10. Retrieved 2009-06-21.[dead link] 103. ^ Brown, Paul (2004-01-08). "An unnatural disaster". The Guardian (London). Retrieved 2009-0621.

104. ^ "World Population Growth, 19502050". Population Reference Bureau. 105. ^ "Citizens arrest". The Guardian. July 11, 2007. 106. ^ "Population Bomb Author's Fix For Next Extinction: Educate Women". Scientific American.
August 12, 2008.

107. ^ a b Wake D. B., Vredenburg V. T. (2008). "Are we in the midst of the sixth mass extinction? A view
from the world of amphibians". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105: 1146611473. doi:10.1073/pnas.0801921105.PMC 2556420. PMID 18695221.

108. ^ Koh, LP; Dunn, RR; Sodhi, NS; Colwell, RK; Proctor, HC; Smith, VS (2004). "Species
coextinctions and the biodiversity crisis". Science 305 (5690): 1632 4.doi:10.1126/science.1101101. PMID 15361627.[dead link]

109. ^ McCallum M. L. (2007). "Amphibian Decline or Extinction? Current Declines Dwarf Background
Extinction Rate" (PDF). Journal of Herpetology 41 (3): 483491.doi:10.1670/00221511(2007)41[483:ADOECD]2.0.CO;2.

110. ^ Jackson, J. B. C. (2008). "Colloquium Paper: Ecological extinction and evolution in the brave new
ocean". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105: 11458 11465.doi:10.1073/pnas.0802812105.

111. ^ Dunn R. R. (2005). "Modern Insect Extinctions, the Neglected Majority" (PDF).Conservation
Biology 19 (4): 10301036. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00078.x.[dead link]

112. ^ Costanza, R.; d'Arge, R.; de Groot, R.; Farberk, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; et al., Karin; Naeem,
Shahid et al. (1997). "The value of the worlds ecosystem services and natural capital.". Nature 387 (6630): 253260. doi:10.1038/387253a0.

113. ^ Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity
Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. [1][dead link]

114. ^ a b c Soule M. E.; Soule, Michael E. (1986). "What is conservation biology?".".BioScience 35 (11):
727734. doi:10.2307/1310054.

115. ^ P. Davis (1996). Museums and the Natural Environment. Leicester University Press. 116. ^ a b F. van Dyke (2008). Conservation Biology: Foundations, Concepts, Applications, 2nd ed.
Springer Verlag. pp. 478. ISBN 978-1-4020-6890-4 (hc).

117. ^ Hunter, M. L. (1996). Fundamentals of Conservation Biology. Blackwell Science Inc., Cambridge,
Massachusetts. ISBN 0-86542-371-7.

118. ^ B. W. Bowen (1999). "Preserving genes, species, or ecosystems? Healing the fractured
foundations of conservation policy". Molecular Ecology, 8:S5-S10.

119. ^ M. E. Soule (ed.) (1986). Conservation Biology: The science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer
Associates Inc.

120. ^ Margules C. R., Pressey R. L. (2000). "Systematic conservation

planning" (PDF).Nature 405 (6783): 243253. doi:10.1038/35012251. PMID 10821285.

121. ^ Example: Gascon, C., Collins, J. P., Moore, R. D., Church, D. R., McKay, J. E. and Mendelson, J.
R. III (eds) (2007). Amphibian Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Amphibian Specialist Group. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 64pp.Amphibians.org[dead link], see also Milleniumassesment.org, Europa.eu

122. ^ Luck, Gary W.; Daily, Gretchen C.; Ehrlich, Paul R. (2003). "Population diversity and ecosystem
services" (PDF). Trends in Ecology & Evolution 18 (7): 331336.doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00100-9.

123. ^ Millenniumassessment.org[dead link] 124. ^ Barcode of Life 125. ^ Eradication of exotic animals (camels) in Australia

126. ^ Belgium creating 45 "seed gardens"; gene banks with intent to reintroduction 127. ^ Economics of biodiversity 128. ^ "Gene Patenting". Ornl.gov. Retrieved 2009-06-21. 129. ^ Fred Bosselman, A Dozen Biodiversity Puzzles, 12 N.Y.U. Environmental Law Journal 364
(2004)

130. ^ Wilson Edward O (2000). "On the Future of Conservation Biology". Conservation Biology14 (1):
13. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.00000-e1.x.

131. ^ Nee S (2004). "More than meets the eye". Nature 429 (6994): 804
805.doi:10.1038/429804a. PMID 15215837.

132. ^ Stork, Nigel E. (2007). "Biodiversity: World of insects". Nature 448 (7154): 657
658.Bibcode 2007Natur.448..657S. doi:10.1038/448657a. PMID 17687315.

133. ^ Thomas J. A., Telfer M. G., Roy D. B., Preston C. D., Greenwood J. J. D., Asher J., Fox R.,
Clarke R. T., Lawton J. H. et al. (2004). "Comparative Losses of British Butterflies, Birds, and Plants and the Global Extinction Crisis". Science 303 (5665): 18791881.doi:10.1126/science.1095046. PMID 15031508.

134. ^ Dunn, Robert R. (2005). "Modern Insect Extinctions, the Neglected Majority".Conservation
Biology 19 (4): 10301036. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00078.x.

[edit]Further

reading

Leveque, C. & J. Mounolou (2003) Biodiversity. New York: John Wiley. ISBN 0-470-84957-6 Margulis, L., Dolan, Delisle, K., Lyons, C. Diversity of Life: The Illustrated Guide to the Five Kingdoms.

Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. ISBN 0-7637-0862-3

Alexander V. Markov, and Andrey V. Korotayev (2007) "Phanerozoic marine biodiversity follows a hyperbolic

trend" Palaeoworld 16(4): pp. 311318.

Moustakas, A. & I. Karakassis (in press). A geographic analysis of the published aquatic biodiversity

research in relation to the ecological footprint of the country where the work was done. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, Doi: 10.1007/s00477-008-0254-2.

Novacek, M. J. (ed.) (2001) The Biodiversity Crisis: Losing What Counts. New York: American Museum of

Natural History Books. ISBN 1-56584-570-6

D+C-Interview with Achim Steiner, UNEP: "Our generation's responsibility

[edit]External

links

A collection of articles from the David Suzuki Foundation on Protecting Biodiversity How many species on Earth?

ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation The WILD Foundation and CEMEX Collaborate on International Wilderness and Biodiversity Conservation in

Mexico

COHAB Initiative: The importance of biodiversity to human health and well-being NatureServe: This site serves as a portal for accessing several types of publicly available biodiversity data Internet sources about biodiversity (presented for the International Year of Biodiversity 2010 by vifabio) The Canine Diversity Project Biodiversity research in agriculture, Swiss Agricultural Research Station Agroscope LiveDiverse project About Biodiversity, Human Well-being & Botanic Gardens Botanic Gardens Conservation International

[edit]Documents
Biodiversity Synthesis Report[dead link] (PDF) by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA, 2005) Convention on Biological Diversity Text of the Convention Conservation International hotspot map Biological Diversity and Strategic Environmental Assessment Waylen, K. 2006. Botanic Gardens: Using biodiversity to improve human well-being Botanic Gardens

Conservation International (BGCI)

[edit]Tools
GLOBIO, an ongoing programme to map the past, current and future impacts of human activities on

biodiversity

World Map of Biodiversity an interactive map from the United Nations Environment Programme World

Conservation Monitoring Centre

[edit]Training

material

Scheldeman, X. & van Zonneveld, M. (2010). Training Manual on Spatial Analysis of Plant Diversity and

Distribution. Bioversity International.

[edit]Resources
Automatic acoustic Monitoring and Inventorying of BIOdiversity Biodiversity Heritage Library - Open access digital library of taxonomic literature.

Biodiversity of Altai-Sayan Ecoregion. Biodiversity at the Open Directory Project Encyclopedia of Life - Documenting all species of life on earth. Tree of Life - Relationships & characteristics of all life on earth. National Biodiversity Network - NBN Gateway. Microdocs, Diversity. Economics of Species protection & Management NOAA Economics

Massive Extinctions From Human Activity

Despite knowing about biodiversitys importance for a long time, human activity has been causing massive extinctions. As the Environment New Service, reported back in August 1999 (previous link): the current extinction rate is now approaching 1,000 times the background rate and may climb to 10,000 times the background rate during the next century, if present trends continue [resulting in] a loss that would easily equal those of past extinctions. (Emphasis added) A major report, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, released in March 2005 highlighted a substantial and largely irreversible loss in the diversity of life on Earth, with some 10-30% of the mammal, bird and amphibian species threatened with extinction, due to human actions. The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) added that Earth is unable to keep up in the struggle to regenerate from the demands we place on it.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) notes in a video that many species are threatened with extinction. In addition,
At threat of extinction are 1 out of 8 birds 1 out of 4 mammals 1 out of 4 conifers 1 out of 3 amphibians 6 out of 7 marine turtles 75% of genetic diversity of agricultural crops has been lost 75% of the worlds fisheries are fully or over exploited Up to 70% of the worlds known species risk extinction if the global temperatures

rise by more than 3.5C

1/3rd of reef-building corals around the world are threatened with extinction Over 350 million people suffer from severe water scarcity

Is this the kind of world we want, it asks? After all, the short video concludes, our lives are inextricably linked with biodiversity and ultimately its protection is essential for our very survival:

In different parts of the world, species face different levels and types of threats. But overall patterns show a downward trend in most cases.

Proportion of all assessed species in different threat categories of extinction risk on the IUCN Red List, based on data from 47,677 species.Source: IUCN, pie chart compiled bySecretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May 2010

As explained in the UNs 3rd Global Biodiversity Outlook, the rate of biodiversity loss has not been reduced because the 5 principle pressures on biodiversity are persistent, even intensifying: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Habitat loss and degradation Climate change Excessive nutrient load and other forms of pollution Over-exploitation and unsustainable use Invasive alien species

Most governments report to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity that these pressures are affecting biodiversity in their country (see p. 55 of the report).

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) maintains the Red List to assess the conservation status of species, subspecies, varieties, and even selected subpopulations on a global scale. Extinction risks out pace any conservation successes. Amphibians are the most at risk, while corals have had a dramatic increase in risk of extinction in recent years.

Threat status of comprehensively assessed species by IUCN.Source: IUCN, compiled by Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May 2010, p. 28 (visit for larger image)

The reasons vary from overuse of resource by humans, climate change, fragmented habitats, habitat destruction, ocean acidification and more.
Global Biodiversity Outlook 3 official video, Convention on Biological Diversity, UNEP, May 2010

Research of long term trends in the fossil record suggests that natural speed limits constrain how quickly biodiversity can rebound after waves of extinction. Hence, the rapid extinction rates mean that it could take a long time for nature to recover. Consider the following observations and conclusions from established experts and institutions summarized by Jaan Suurkula, M.D. and chairman of Physicians and Scientists for Responsible Application of Science and Technology (PSRAST), noting the impact that global warming will have on ecosystems and biodiversity: The world environmental situation is likely to be further aggravated by the increasingly rapid, large scale global extinction of species. It occurred in the 20th century at a rate that was a thousand times higher than the average rate during the preceding 65 million years. This is likely to destabilize various ecosystems including agricultural systems. In a slow extinction, various balancing mechanisms can develop. Noone knows what will be the result of this extremely rapid extinction rate. What is known, for sure, is that the world ecological system has been kept in balance through a very complex and multifaceted interaction between a huge number of species. This rapid extinction is therefore likely to precipitate collapses of ecosystems at a global scale. This is predicted to create large-scale agricultural problems, threatening food supplies to hundreds of millions of people. This ecological prediction does not take into consideration the effects of global warming which will further aggravate the situation. Industrialized fishing has contributed importantly to mass extinction due to repeatedly failed attempts at limiting the fishing. A new global study concludes that 90 percent of all large fishes have disappeared from the worlds oceans in the past half century, the devastating result of industrial fishing. The study, which took 10 years to complete and was published in the international journal Nature, paints a grim picture of the Earths current populations of such species as sharks, swordfish, tuna and marlin. The loss of predatory fishes is likely to cause multiple complex imbalances in marine ecology.

Another cause for extensive fish extinction is the destruction of coral reefs. This is caused by a combination of causes, including warming of oceans, damage from fishing tools and a harmful infection of coral organisms promoted by ocean pollution. It will take hundreds of thousands of years to restore what is now being destroyed in a few decades. According to the most comprehensive study done so far in this field, over a million species will be lost in the coming 50 years. The most important cause was found to be climate change. NOTE: The above presentation encompasses only the most important and burning global environmental problems. There are several additional ones, especially in the field of chemical pollution that contribute to harm the environment or upset the ecological balance.

Jaan Suurkula, World-wide cooperation required to prevent global crisis; Part one the problem, Physicians and Scientists for Responsible Application of Science and Technology, February 6, 2004 [Emphasis is original] Additionally, as reported by UC Berkeley, using DNA comparisons, scientists have discovered what they have termed as an evolutionary concept called parallelism, a situation where two organisms independently come up with the same adaptation to a particular environment. This has an additional ramification when it comes to protecting biodiversity and endangered species. This is because in the past what we may have considered to be one species could actually be many. But, as pointed out by scientists, by putting them all in one group, it under-represents biodiversity, and these different evolutionarily species would not be getting the protection otherwise needed.
Back to top

Declining Amphibian Populations

Amphibians are particularly sensitive to changes in the environment. Amphibians have been described as a marker species or the equivalent of canaries of the coal mines meaning they provide an important signal to the health of biodiversity; when they are stressed and struggling, biodiversity may be under pressure. When they are doing well, biodiversity is probably healthy.

Unfortunately, as has been feared for many years now, amphibian species are declining at an alarming rate.

The Golden Toad of Monteverde, Costa Rica was among the first casualties of amphibian declines. Formerly abundant, it was last seen in 1989. (Source: Wikipedia)

Malcom MacCallum of the Biological Sciences Program, Texas A&M University calculated that the current extinction rate of amphibians could be 211 times the background amphibian extinction rate . He added that If current estimates of amphibian species in imminent danger of extinction are included in these calculations, then the current amphibian extinction rate may range from 25,03945,474 times the background extinction rate for amphibians. It is difficult to explain this unprecedented and accelerating rate of extinction as a natural phenomenon. (Emphasis added)
Back to top

Lizards Threatened By Climate Change

(Image credit: Iker Cortabarria)

What the BBC described as a global-scale study published in the journalScience found that climate change could wipe out 20% of the world's lizard species by 2080. Global projection models used by the scientists suggested that lizards have already crossed a threshold for extinctions caused by climate change. The fear of lowland species moving to higher elevations has long been predicted as an effect of climate change. This has been observed with lizard populations too, as the leader of the research team told the BBC. For more information, see this sites section on biodiversity and climate change. Back to top

Dwindling Fish Stocks

The UNs 3rd Global Biodiversity Outlook report, mentioned earlier, notes that, About 80 percent of the world marine fish stocks for which assessment information is available are fully exploited or overexploited. Fish stocks assessed since 1977 have experienced an 11% decline in total biomass globally, with considerable regional variation. The average maximum size of fish caught declined by 22% since 1959 globally for all assessed communities. There is also an increasing trend of stock collapses over time, with 14% of assessed stocks collapsed in 2007.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010), Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May, 2010, p.48 IPS reports that fish catches are expected to decline dramatically in the worlds tropical regions because of climate change. Furthermore, in 2006, aquaculture consumed 57 percent of fish meal and 87 percent of fish oil as industrial fisheries operating in tropical regions have been scooping up enormous amounts of fish anchovies, herring, mackerel and other small pelagic forage fish to feed to farmed salmon or turn into animal feed or pet food. This has resulted in higher prices for fish, hitting the poorest the most. As Suurkula mentioned above, mass extinctions of marine life due to industrialized fishing has been a concern for many years. Yet, it rarely makes mainstream headlines.

However, a report warning of marine species loss becoming a threat to the entire global fishing industry did gain media attention.

(Image source: Wikipedia)

A research article in the journal,Science, warned commercial fish and seafood species may all crash by 2048. At the current rate of loss, it is feared the oceans may never recover.Extensive coastal pollution, climate change, over-fishing and the enormously wasteful practice of deepsea trawling are all contributing to the problem, as Inter Press Service (IPS) summarized. As also explained on this sites biodiversity importance section,ecosystems are incredibly productive and efficientwhen there is sufficient biodiversity. Each form of life works together with the surrounding environment to help recycle waste, maintain the ecosystem, and provide services that othersincluding humansuse and benefit from. For example, as Steve Palumbi of Stamford University (and one of the authors of the paper) noted, the ocean ecosystems can
Take sewage and recycle it into nutrients; Scrub toxins out of the water; Produce food for many species, including humans Turns carbon dioxide into food and oxygen

With massive species loss, the report warns, at current rates, in less than 50 years, the ecosystems could reach the point of no return, where they would not be able to regenerate themselves.

Dr. Boris Worm, one of the papers authors, and a world leader in ocean research, commented that: Whether we looked at tide pools or studies over the entire worlds ocean, we saw the same picture emerging. In losing species we lose the productivity and stability of entire ecosystems. I was shocked and disturbed by how consistent these trends arebeyond anything we suspected.

Dr. Boris Worm, Losing species, Dalhousie University, November 3, 2006 Current is an important word, implying that while things look dire, there are solutions and it is not too late yet. The above report and the IPS article noted that protected areas show that biodiversity can be restored quickly. Unfortunately, less than 1% of the global ocean is effectively protected right now and where [recovery has been observed] we see immediate economic benefits, says Dr. Worm. Time is therefore of the essence. In an update to the above story, 3 years later, 2009, Dr. Worm was a bit more optimistic that some fish stocks can rebound, if managed properly. But it is a tough challenge since 80 percent of global fisheries are already fully or over-exploited. An example of overfishing that has a ripple-effect on the whole fish-food chain is shark hunting.

The Great White Shark is the largest predatory fish. (Source: Wikipedia)

Millions of sharks are killed each year from overfishing and trade. Many die accidentally in fishing nets set for tuna and swordfish, while others are caught for their meat or just for their fins. A demand for shark-fin soup in places like China and Taiwan is decimating shark populations. Shark fin soup is considered a delicacy (not even a necessity) and can be extremely lucrative. So much money can be obtained just from the fin that fishermen hunting sharks will simply catch sharks and cut off their fins while they are alive, tossing the wriggling shark back into the ocean (to die, as it cannot swim without its fin). This saves a lot of room on fishing boats. Some video footage shown on documentaries such as National Geographic reveal how barbaric and wasteful this practice is. Sharks are known as the apex predator of the seas. That is because in general sharks are at the top of the food chain. Without sufficient shark numbers the balance they provide to the ecosystem is threatened because nature evolved this balance through many millennia. As WWF, the global conservation organization notes, Contrary to popular belief, shark fins have little nutritional value and may even be harmful to your health over the long term as fins have been found to contain high levels of mercury. Another effect of overfishing has been the rise in illegal fishing. But even legal, hightech fishing has caused other social problems. Poor fishermen in Somalia have found themselves without livelihoods as international fishing ships have come into their area destroying their livelihoods. Some of them have then resorted to piracy in desperation. Clearly not all blame should be laid at the international fishing system as it is also individual choice, but the desperation and other geopolitical issues in the region can turn people to do things they normally would not.
Back to top

Declining Ocean Biodiversity

It is not just fish in the oceans that may be struggling, but most biodiversity in the seas. This includes mammals (e.g. whales, dolphins, polar bears), birds (e.g. penguins), and other creatures (e.g. krill).

The Census of Marine Life is a global network of researchers and scientists. Theyve been involved in a decade-long initiative to assess diversity, distribution and abundance of life in the oceans. A better understanding of these complex systems is clearly important given our dependence on the marine ecosystem in various ways.
Brief explanation of why we need to monitor ocean biodiversity, Ocean Observations Biodiversity Video, Census on Marine Life, November 28, 2007 Australian, Japanese, Chinese, Mediterranean and Mexican Gulf waters most biodiverse; What Lives in the Sea?, Census on Marine Life, August 2, 2010

This first Census of Marine Life (CoML) hopes to act as a baseline of how human activity is affecting previously unexplored marine ecosystems. A database of global marine life has also published as well as numerous videos (also on YouTube) and images. Although it is a large project (in terms of cost, scope and duration), there are still many unknowns that will need further research. For example, the current number of known marine species is estimated at 250,000. However, scientists believe that there as many as three times this number are yet to be discovered and named. (See page 3 of their main2010 report.) The Census was able to determine, however, that over-fishing was reported to be the greatest threat to marine biodiversity in all regions followed by habitat loss and pollution. One of the summary reports also added that the fact that these threats were reported in all regions indicates their global nature. A collection of regional and overview reports were also published on the Public Library of Science web site In the past century, commercial whaling has decimated numerous whale populations, many of which have struggled to recover.

Whaling stations like this one in the Faroe Islands is also used to hold hunted dolphins and other animals. (Image source: Wikipedia)

Commercial whaling in the past was for whale oil. With no reason to use whale oil today, commercial whaling is mainly for food, while there is also some hunting for scientific research purposes. Large scale commercialized whaling was so destructive that in 1986 a moratorium on whaling was set up by the International Whaling Commission (IWC). As early as the mid1930s, there were international attempts to recognize the impact of whaling and try and make it more sustainable, resulting in the actual set up of the IWC in 1946. Many commercial whaling nations have been part of this moratorium but have various objections and other pressures to try and resume whaling.

Japan often claims its whale-hunting is for scientific research; the general population are often quite skeptical of such claims. (Image source: Greenpeace)

Japan is the prime example of hunting whales for the stated aim of scientific research while a lot of skepticism says it is for food. Greenpeace and other organizations often release findings that argue Japans whaling to be excessive or primarily for food, and for research as secondary. General public negativity of commercial whaling has also led to a difference between traditional whaling communities in the arctic region and conservationists. Traditional indigenous communities have typically hunted whale in far smaller numbers commercially, mostly for local food consumption, but the impacts of large-scale commercial whaling has meant even their hunting is under pressure.

Some have argued for whale hunting as a way to sustain other marine populations.National Geographic Wild aired a program called, A Life Among Whales (broadcast June 14, 2008). It noted how a few decades ago, some fishermen campaigned for killing whales because they were apparently threatening the fish supply. A chain of events eventually came full circle and led to a loss of jobs:
The massive reduction in the local whale population meant the killer whales in

that region (that usually preyed on the younger whales) moved to other animals such as seals
As seal numbers declined, the killer whales targeted otters As otter numbers were decimated, the urchins and other targets of otters

flourished
These decimated the kelp forests where many fish larvae grew in relative

protection
The exposed fish larvae were easy pickings for a variety of sea life Fishermens livelihoods were destroyed.

This may be a vivid example of humans interfering and altering the balance of ecosystems and misunderstanding the importance of biodiversity. Dr. Sylvia Earle, described as a Living Legend by the US Library of Congress, is a world-renowned oceanographer, explorer, author, and lecturer. In the early 1990s she was the Chief Scientist of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration in the US. In 2009 she won the prestigious TED prize. As part of the prize, she was able to share a wish, which captured some major concerns about dwindling ocean biodiversity and its importance to all life on earth:
Sylvia Earle, Heres how to protect the blue heart of the planet, TED Talks, February 2009

Increasing rapid ocean acidification, caused by the oceans absorbing more carbon dioxide than usual (because it is emitted by humans more than it should) also affects marine ecosystems, as explained on this sites climate change and biodiversity page. Back to top

Inland Water Ecosystems

We use water for a variety of purposes from agricultural, domestic and industrial uses. This has involved activities that alter surrounding ecosystems, such as drainage, diversion of water for irrigation, industrial and domestic use, contaminating water with excess nutrient run-off (e.g. from fertilizers) and industrial waste, building damns, etc.

The UNs 3rd Global Biodiversity Outlook report also mentioned earlier notes that shallow-water wetlands such as marshes, swamps and shallow lakes have declined significantly in many parts of the world. (p.42). The report also notes that water quality in freshwater ecosystems is an important biodiversity indicator, yet global data is quite lacking. But there are numerous examples that are known. Quoting a number of examples from the report,
Between 56% and 65% of inland water systems suitable for use in intensive

agriculture in Europe and North America had been drained by 1985. The respective figures for Asia and South America were 27% and 6%.
73% of marshes in northern Greece have been drained since 1930. 60% of the original wetland area of Spain has been lost. The Mesopotamian marshes of Iraq lost more than 90% of their original extent

between the 1970s and 2002, following a massive and systematic drainage project. Following the fall of the former Iraqi regime in 2003 many drainage structures have been dismantled, and the marshes were reflooded to approximately 58% of their former extent by the end of 2006, with a significant recovery of marsh vegetation.
More than 40% of the global river discharge is now intercepted by large dams

and one-third of sediment destined for the coastal zones no longer arrives. These large-scale disruptions have had a major impact on fish migration, freshwater biodiversity more generally and the services it provides. They also have a significant influence on biodiversity in terrestrial, coastal and marine ecosystems. The report also notes that The number of observed dead zones, coastal sea areas where water oxygen levels have dropped too low to support most marine life, has roughly doubled each decade since the 1960s. Many are concentrated near the estuaries of major rivers, and result from the buildup of nutrients, largely carried from inland agricultural areas where fertilizers are washed into watercourses. The nutrients promote the growth of algae that die and decompose on the seabed, depleting the water of oxygen and threatening fisheries, livelihoods and tourism. (p. 60)

Source: Updated from Diaz and Rosenberg (2008). Science.Graph compiled by Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May 2010, p.60

We can be optimistic and believe human ingenuity will solve these kind of problems. For example,
The report does add that combating nutrient pollution can work and overtime

reverse the pressure on ecosystems. A number of European nations have been doing this recently.
Additionally, an estimated 12% of the area of the worlds inland waters are

included within protected areas.

Governments of 159 countries have ratified the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands,

currently committed to conserving 1,880 wetlands of international importance, covering over 1.8 million square km, and to the sustainable use of wetland resources generally.
In many countries, steps are being taken to restore wetlands, often reversing

previous, sometimes recent land-use policies as there is increased recognition of the multiple benefits such as purification of water, protection from natural disasters, food and materials for local livelihoods and income from tourism.

However, it is not all rosy. As the report also notes. For example, despite the Ramsar Convention, conditions of those protected areas continue to deteriorate. Furthermore, In some areas, depletion and pollution of economically important water resources have gone beyond the point of no return, and coping with a future without reliable water resources systems is now a real prospect in parts of the world. UNESCOs Third World Water Development Report predicts that nearly half of humanity will be living in areas of high water stress by 2030.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010), Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May, 2010, p.43 This sites section on water and development looks into water related issues in more depth.
Back to top

Loss Of Forests Equates To A Loss Of Many Species

Centre for Science and Environment, Campaign on Forests

A 20-year study has shown that deforestation and introduction of non-native species has led to about 12.5% of the worlds plant species to become critically rare. (In fact, as an example, a study suggests that the Amazon damage is worse than previously thought, due to previously undetected types of selective logging and deforestation.) A report from the World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development suggests that the forests of the world have been exploited to the point of crisis and that major

changes in global forest management strategies would be needed to avoid the devastation. What also makes this a problem is that many of the endangered species are only found in small areas of land, often within the borders of a single country. New species of animals and plants are still being discovered. In Papua New Guinea, 44 new species of animals were discovered recently in the forests. Logging may affect these animals habitats, though. The loss of rainforests around the world, where many species of life are found will mean that potential knowledge, whether medicinal, sustenance sources, or evolutionary and scientific information etc. could be lost. Brazil, which is estimated to have around 55,000 species of flora, amounting to some 22% of the worlds total and India for example, which has about 46,000 and some 81,000 animal species (amounting to some 8% of the worlds biodiversity), are also under various pressures, from corporate globalization, deforrestation, etc. So too are many other biodiverse regions, such as Indonesia, parts of Africa, and other tropical regions. The UNs 3rd Global Biodiversity Outlook report, mentioned earlier, also notes the extent to which deforestation is occurring as well as measures to address associated concerns. The report notes (p.32) that forests
Are approximately 31% of the Earths land surface, Contain more than half of all terrestrial animal and plant species (mostly in the

tropics), and
Account for more than two-thirds of net primary production on land the

conversion of solar energy into plant matter. Deforestation, however, continues at an alarming rate, despite recent decreases in several tropical countries.

Comparing actual area of Brazilian portion of the Amazon deforested each year between 1990 and 2009 including the projected rate based on Brazilian government targets to reduce deforestation by 80% by 2020, and cumulative total deforestation as a percentage of the estimated original extent of the Brazilian Amazon (4.1 million km2).Source: Brazilian National Space Research Agency (INPE), graph compiled bySecretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May 2010, p.33

The significant decline noted in the Brazilian Amazon is not enough to prevent the World Bank worrying about the future. The Global Biodiversity Outlook report notes that According to a recent study co-ordinated by the World Bank, 20% Amazon deforestation would be sufficient to trigger significant dieback of forest in some parts of the biome by 2025, when coupled with other pressures such as climate change and forest fires. Furthermore, some of the reversals in deforestation is because of reforestation, but the report raises the same concerns as also noted further below. Namely, Since newlyplanted forests often have low biodiversity value and may only include a single tree species, a slowing of net forest loss does not necessarily imply a slowing in the loss of global forest biodiversity. Between 2000 and 2010, the global extent of primary forest

(that is, substantially undisturbed) declined by more than 400,000 square km, an area larger than Zimbabwe. (p. 32)

Sustainable Forests Or Sustainable Profits?

The overly corporate-led form of globalization that we see today also affects how natural resources are used and what priorities they are used for. It is true that cutting down forests or converting natural forests into monocultures of pine and eucalyptus for industrial raw material generates revenues and growth. But this growth is based on robbing the forest of its biodiversity and its capacity to conserve soil and water. This growth is based on robbing forest communities of their sources of food, fodder, fuel, fiber, medicine, and security from floods and drought.

Vandana Shiva, Stolen Harvest, (South End Press, 2000), p.1

(Image source: Wikipedia)

We hear more about sustainable forestry practices by the large logging multinationals. However, what does that really mean? Who is it sustainable for? Society and the environment, or for the logging companies? By replanting trees that will grow quickly and allow them to be felled for sustained logging sounds like a good strategy. However, the trees that are favored for this (eucalyptus) require a lot of water to grow so quickly. As John Madeley points out:

[T]he [eucalyptus] trees achieve this rapid growth by tapping large quantities of groundwater, impoverishing surrounding vegetation and threatening to dry up local water courses.

John Madeley, Big Business Poor Peoples; The Impact of Transnational Corporations on the Worlds Poor, (Zed Books, 1999) p.76. Madeley continues by describing the impact that the use of chemicals to treat woodpulp from the eucalyptus has on local fisheries and on food production. This has had terrible effects on indigenous people within such regions. 10 years on from the above, Inter Press Service notes similar things, as activists around the Amazon complain about tree plantations.

Illegal Timber Trade On A Large Scale

Some government institutions even buy illegal timber from pristine forests. For example, it is claimed that UK buys all of its Mahogany from pristine forests in Brazil where 80% of all timber is traded illegally. Even though Brazil has now tried to introduce a moratorium on Mahogany logging for two years, this has been slammed by some as too little, too late.

Legal Timber Trade On A Large Scale

Under much secrecy, there is a push from USA and Asian economies to reduce tariffs for wood and paper products. Also at the WTO Ministerial meeting in November 1999, opening more markets for easier access was the agenda, which included forests.

People And Forests

Quite often we make blanket statements or generalized conclusions that people are the cause of deforestation. While that is true, unfortunately all people around the world are not equal, and it also also follows that some are more responsible for deforestation than others. Often, in forests of the Amazon, Africa, or Asia, forest protection schemes have been promoted that go against indigenous peoples and cultures, rather than work with them.

As Indian activist and scientist Vandana Shiva and others have shown in countless work, indigenous people often have their cultures and lifestyle structured in a way that works with nature and would not undermine their own resource base. For example, in her bookStolen Harvests (South End Press, 2000) she describes how their traditional knowledge has been beneficial to the environment and has been developed and geared towards this understanding and respect of the ecosystems around them.

Hopetoun falls, Australia; an example of trying to preserve nature while allowing tourism. (Source: Wikipedia)

Yet because of blanket conclusions that humankind is responsible for deforestation, we risk assuming all types of societies are equally responsible for deforestation that is damaging to the environment. (This hints then, that for sustainable development projects, a more participatory approach can be accepted by local people, reducing the chance for conflict and distrust and therefore be more likely to succeed as well.) As the cartoon, further above, from the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment notes, logging companies and others can often have a larger impact on deforestation. Industrial agriculture and beef production for example, is a major cause of deforestation in the Amazon, to raise cattle. This is not even for local needs, but to meet fast food restaurant demands in the Northern countries. A combination of geopolitics and economic agreements foster a scenario for such results to occur. The UNs 3rd Global Biodiversity Outlook report, mentioned earlier, also notes how indigenous communities can benefit their local environments and is quoted at length:

Indigenous and local communities play a significant role in conserving very substantial areas of high biodiversity and cultural value. In addition to officially-designated protected areas, there are many thousand Community Conserved Areas (CCAs) across the world, including sacred forests, wetlands, and landscapes, village lakes, catchment forests, river and coastal stretches and marine areas. These are natural and/or modified ecosystems of significant value in terms of their biodiversity, cultural significance and ecological services. They are voluntarily conserved by indigenous and local communities, through customary laws or other effective means, and are not usually included in official protected area statistics. Globally, 4 to 8 million square km (the larger estimate is an area bigger than Australia) are owned or administered by communities. In 18 developing countries with the largest forest cover, over 22% of forests are owned by or reserved for communities. In some of these countries (for example Mexico and Papua New Guinea) the community forests cover 80% of the total. By no means all areas under community control effectively conserved, but a substantial portion are. In fact, some studies show that levels of protection are actually higher under community or indigenous management than under government management alone.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010), Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May, 2010, pp.40 41 For more on this aspect of people and biodiversity, you can see also the following:
Centre for Science and Environment have a lot of resources on such issues. As an

example, you can see:

Forest campaign Pining for More, an article from their Down to Earth magazine (Vol 10, No

18 February 15, 2001). This article describes how Pine-based sustainable forests are not sustainable at all, and that Pine trees even make forest fires spread rapidly, while degrading local ecology, but grow fast, which is good for business.
Participatory Forest ManagementRestoring Ecological Health and Enhancing

Economic Opportunity in Sub-Saharan Africa, by Todd Beer, Grassroots

Globalization Network, Summer 2002. This is a report looking at how local communities in Sub-Saharan Africa can be beneficial to sustainable forest management.
Vandana Shiva web site On this web sites population and environmental stress section, there is in-depth

discussion on flawed and missed out assumption regarding ecological limits and factors that affect environmental degradation. These errors lead to often blaming the wrong groups of people for the problems and therefore lead to the promotion of inappropriate policies to deal with the issues.
Beef from this web site describes many aspects of deforestation and provides

links and sources to other information.

Ogiek web site. This web site is about the Ogiek indigenous people of Kenyas

Mau Forest, and highlights an example of how they are being denied to live on their lands, for fears of deforestation issues. Yet, logging companies have an interest in this forest as well.
Saving forests: an inspiring success story from India from ID21 provides a

summary of findings in India.

More Information
Some possible starting points for additional information include the following:
The World Resources Institute: Forest Frontiers Initiative. Forests section. Climate, Biodiversity, and Forests report, which looks at the link between

forests, land-use and global warming.

World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development This article titled Forests and Deforestation. This is a good article which also

points out that humans are not inherently harmful to forest, and have in some cases positively contributed to forest evolution. It has a good look at various factors involved.
ActivistNet deforestation resources. The Forests section from the Global Warming part of this web site, describes

some of the relations between things like deforestation, carbon sinks and climate change.

Back to top

Misuse Of Land And Resources

How land is used to produce food can have enormous impacts on the environment and its sustainability. And this often has nothing to do with populations. Take the following as an example: Junk-food chains, including KFC and Pizza Hut, are under attack from major environmental groups in the United States and other developed countries because of their environmental impact. Intensive breeding of livestock and poultry for such restaurants leads to deforestation, land degradation, and contamination of water sources and other natural resources. For every pound of red meat, poultry, eggs, and milk produced, farm fields lose about five pounds of irreplaceable top soil. The water necessary for meat breeding comes to about 190 gallons per animal per day, or ten times what a normal Indian family is supposed to use in one day, if it gets water at all. Overall, animal farms use nearly 40 percent of the worlds total grain production. In the United States, nearly 70 percent of grain production is fed to livestock. In Indian Agriculture, women use up to 150 different species of plants (which the biotech industry would call weeds) as medicine, food, or fodder. For the poorest, this biodiversity is the most important resource for survival. What is a weed for Monsanto is a medicinal plant or food for rural people.

Vandana Shiva, Stolen Harvest, (South End Press, 2000), pp. 70-71, 104-105. Because industrial agriculture promotes the use of monocultures, rather than a diversity of crops, the loss of biodiversity is leading to more resource usage, as described above. This as well as other political situations such as the motives for dumping surplus food on to developing countries to undersell the local farmers, leads to further hunger around the world. For more information on land and hunger issues, this web site provides sections on:
Food Dumping [Aid] Maintains Poverty

 Land Rights Consumption and Consumerism Food and Agriculture Issues Back to top

Long Term Costs

If ecosystems deteriorates to an unsustainable level, then the problems resulting can be very expensive, economically, to reverse. In Bangladesh and India, for example, logging of trees and forests means that the floods during the monsoon seasons can be very deadly. Similarly, many avalanches, and mud slides in many regions around the world that have claimed many lives, may have been made worse by the clearing of so many forests, which provide a natural barrier, that can take the brunt of such forces. As the Centre for Science and Environment mentions, factors such as climate change and environmental degradation can impact regions more so, and make the impacts of severe weather systems even worse than they already are. As they further point out, for poor regions, such as Orissa in India, this is even more of a problem. Vanishing coral reefs, forests and other ecosystems can all take their toll and even make the effects of some natural events even worse. The cost of the effects together with the related problems that can arise (like disease, and other illness, or rebuilding and so on) is much more costly than the maintenance and sustainable development practices that could be used instead. As an example, and assuming a somewhat alarmist scenario, if enough trees and forests and related ecosystems vanish or deteriorate sufficiently:
Then the oxygen-producing benefits from such ecosystems is threatened. The atmosphere would suffer from more pollution. The cost to tackle this and the related illnesses, problems and other cascading

effects would be enormous (as it can be assumed that industrial pollution could increase, with less natural ecosystems to soak it up)

 Furthermore, other species in that ecosystem that would depend on this would

be further at risk as well, which would lead to a downward spiral for that ecosystem. Compare those costs to taking precautionary measures such as protecting forests and promoting more sustainable forms of development. Of course, people will argue that these situations will not occur for whatever reasons. Only when it is too late can others say told you so a perhaps very nasty Catch 22. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) is an organization backed by the UN and various European governments attempting to compile, build and make a compelling economics case for the conservation of ecosystems and biodiversity. It has also attempted to put a value on the ecological services provided to humanity. It found, for example, implementing REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) could help
Halve deforestation by 2030, and Cut emissions by 1.5 Gt of CO2 per year.

From a cost perspective (p.18), it is estimated that

It would cost from US$ 17.2 33 billion per year The estimated benefit in reduced climate change is US$ 3.2 trillion

In addition, they cited another study that estimated that 3,000 listed companies around the world were responsible for over $2 trillion in environmental externalities (i.e. costs that have to be borne by society from ignored factors, or social costs). This is equivalent to 7% of their combined revenues and up to a third of their combined profits. The benefits of these silent parts of our economy is also summarized in these videos by TEEBs Pavan Sukhdev:
What the global economy would look like with nature on the balance sheetWhat is the world worth?, TEEB, November 15, 2010

The hidden environmental and social costs from corporationsThe Invisible Economy, TEEB,
January 12, 2011

Social costs to some segments of society can also be high. Take for example the various indigenous Indians of Latin America. Throughout the region, as aspects of corporate globalization spread, there is growing conflict between land and resources of the indigenous communities, and those required to meet globalization related needs. The following quote from a report on this issue captures this quite well: Many of the natural resources found on Indian lands have become more valuable in the context of the modern global economy. Several factors have spurred renewed interest in natural resources on Indian lands in Latin America, among them the mobility of capital, ecological limits to growth in developed countries, lax environmental restrictions in underdeveloped nations, lower transportation costs, advances in biotechnology, cheap third world labor, and national privatization policies. Limits to logging in developed countries have led timber transnationals overseas. Increased demand and higher prices for minerals have generated the reopening of mines and the proliferation of small-scale mining operations. Rivers are coveted for their hydroelectric potential, and bioprospecting has put a price tag on biodiversity. Originally considered lands unsuitable for productive activities, the resources on Indian lands are currently the resources of the future. Indian land rights and decisionmaking authority regarding natural resource use on territories to which they hold claim threaten the mobility of capital and access to resourceskey elements of the transnational-led globalization model. Accordingly, increased globalization has generally sharpened national conservative opposition to indigenous rights in the Americas and elsewhere in the name of making the world safe for investment. The World Trade Organization (WTO), free trade agreements, and transnational corporations are openly hostile to any legislation that might create barriers to investment or the unlimited exploitation of natural resources on Indian lands. The result has been a growing number of conflicts between indigenous communities and governments and transnational corporations over control of natural resources.

 Laura Carlsen, Indigenous Communities in Latin America: Fighting for Control of Natural Resources in a Globalized Age, Americas Program, (Silver City, NM: Interhemispheric Resource Center), July 26, 2002. Back to top

The Military And The Environment

Many military forces of the world also have an effect on the environment. Sometimes, the scale of problems they leave when they move out of a training area or conflict is considerable. In some nations, such as the United States, the military can be exempt from many environmental regulations. By no means a complete set of examples, the following illustrate some of the issues:
In the Gulf War and Kosovo crisis, the US and UK used depleted Uranium which

haveenvironmental consequences as well.

In the Vietnam war, the US used Agent Orange to defoliate the entire Vietnamese

rainforest ecosystem. The effects are still being felt.

In the Democratic Republic of Congo, various forces often kill gorillas and other

animals as they encroach upon their land.

In Okinawa, the large US military bases also affect the environment for the local

population.
Vieques, Puerto Rico, the US use live rounds in bombing ranges, and low altitude

flying for training. This also has had an effect on the environment.
A report prepared by the Institute for Policy Studies, April 2000, called The

International Grassroots Summit on Military Base Cleanup provides a lot of details and many more examples.
Back to top

Attempts To Promote Biodiversity Outweighed By Activities Against It

At the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development (the Earth Summit), theConvention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was born. 192 countries, plus the EU, are now Parties to that convention. In April 2002, the Parties to the Convention committed to significantly reduce the loss of biodiversity loss by 2010.

Perhaps predictably, that did not happen. As the Global Biodiversity Outlook report summarizes, despite numerous successful conservations measures supporting biodiversity, The 2010 biodiversity target has not been met at the global level. None of the twentyone sub-targets accompanying the overall target of significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010 can be said definitively to have been achieved globally, although some have been partially or locally achieved. Despite an increase in conservation efforts, the state of biodiversity continues to decline, according to most indicators, largely because the pressures on biodiversity continue to increase. There is no indication of a significant reduction in the rate of decline in biodiversity, nor of a significant reduction in pressures upon it.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010), Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May, 2010, p.17 Furthermore, Action to implement the Convention on Biological Diversity has not been taken on a sufficient scale to address the pressures on biodiversity in most places. There has been insufficient integration of biodiversity issues into broader policies, strategies and programmes, and the underlying drivers of biodiversity loss have not been addressed significantly. Actions to promote biodiversity receive a tiny fraction of funding compared to infrastructure and industrial developments. Moreover, biodiversity considerations are often ignored when such developments. Actions to address the underlying drivers of biodiversity loss, including demographic, economic, technological, socio-political and cultural pressures, in meaningful ways, have also been limited. Most future scenarios project continuing high levels of extinctions and loss of habitats throughout this century, with associated decline of some ecosystem services important to human well-being.

 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010), Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May, 2010, pp.910 Most indicators of the state of biodiversity show negative trends, with no significant reduction in the rate of decline:

Summary of available biodiversity indicators.Graphs compiled by Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May 2010, p.68 (which has further details)

An example of the positive efforts has been the growth in protected areas in recent years, including more protected marine areas:

The extent of nationally designated protected areas, 1970 to 2008 has generally increased.Source: UNEP-WCMC, graph compiled by Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May 2010, p.36

However, the level of protection in protected areas is mostly basic: Despite more than 12 per cent of land now being covered by protected areas, nearly half (44%) of terrestrial eco-regions fall below 10 per cent protection, and many of the most critical sites for biodiversity lie outside protected areas. Of those protected areas where effectiveness of management has been assessed, 13% were judged to be clearly

inadequate, while more than one fifth demonstrated sound management, and the remainder were classed as basic.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010), Global Biodiversity Outlook 3, May, 2010, p.35 Although some dislike the thought of trying to put an economic value on biodiversity (some things are just priceless), there have been attempts to do so in order for people to understand the magnitude of the issue: how important the environment is to humanity and what costs and benefits there can be in doing (or not doing) something. For example, In a recent report, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for National and International Policy Makers 2009 noted the following (p.18): Implementing REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) could help
Halve deforestation by 2030, and Cut emissions by 1.5 Gt of CO2 per year.

, the UN-backed TEEB organization

From a cost perspective (p.18), it is estimated that

It would cost from US$ 17.2 33 billion per year The estimated benefit in reduced climate change is US$ 3.2 trillion The above would be a good return on the initial investment. By contrast, waiting

10 more years could reduce the net benefit of halving deforestation by US$ 500 billion. (The BBC puts that saving in a range, of $2 - 5 trillion, dwarfing costs of the banking crisis.) Another BBC article notes that biodiversity is fundamental to economics. For example,
The G8 nations, together with 5 major emerging economies China, India, South

Africa, Brazil, Mexico use almost three-quarters of the Earths biocapacity

An estimated 40% of world trade is based on biological products or processes.

Regardless of what one thinks about trying to put a monetary value on parts of the environment, the above numbers add to the case that taking care of the environment is important. (This particular issue is explored a bit further on this sites page on why biodiversity is important.)
Back to top

Other Related Global Issues And Causes

Why is it that these problems seem to be in developing countries? Dont they know how to take care of their environment? That is what many ask in the industrialized nations. What people in the richer countries often fail to realize is that often their very own lending hand has been the one that takes most of what the environment has to offer, often in an unsustainable way. The debt that the poor countries are in has led to the stripping of resources in order to pay back what is owed. To learn more:
This web sites look at Consumption and consumerism provides a deeper look at

the enormous costs to society and to the environment by certain consumption habits. Given that the culture of consumption is so central to most societies today, it is often the system itself that is very wasteful.
This web sites page on Debt and the Environment has more about the effects of

debt on poverty and the environment.

this web sites page on structural adjustment has more details of how debt has

occurred and the structural adjustment policies that have led to governments stripping their environmental resources, reducing the cost of labor, exporting more to the industrialized countries, often without feeding their own people first, repaying more debt than spending on health or education, and so on.
We have seen a glimpse of how the environment is related to global policies that

have caused poverty and how poverty can affect the environment. Slowly, projects are helping at the local level for people to take ownership of their environment and help foster a sustainable development cycle. However, globalization, in its current form may have additional effects on the environment too. To learn more about how trade and poverty in general are related, go to this web sites section on Trade, Economy, & Related Issues.
The Genetically Engineered Food section in this web site also discusses issues to

do with patenting foods and seeds and introduces issues to do with the importance of agricultural diversity and other issues related to patents on genetic resources.

 Priscila Nri, from the social justice organization, Witness, posts an informative

video asking if environmental rights are human rights. The point made is that for many communities, the environment provides a means for them to live. Environmental degradation jeopardizes that and as such, threaten their human rights too; the two are interwoven:

BIODIVERSITY AND POVERTY ALLEVIATION CALL FOR PAPERS Many of the worlds poorest people depend on biological resources for food, shelter, medicines and their livelihood. The loss of ecosystems, species and genetic resources profoundly threatens not only their wellbeing but their very survival. Those who live in poverty may utilize biological resources in an unsustainable manner, threatening the very species they depend on. Furthermore, the forces that contribute to poverty, such as climate change and overpopulation, also result in the loss of biodiversity. These linkages between poverty and biodiversity are often complex and difficult to articulate. Researchers have pointed to the need to assemble evidence upon which appropriate interventions can be made to ensure that development and biological

conservation are complimentary. Biodiversity is a peerreviewed, international journal that seeks to contribute to the understanding, protection and restoration of the diversity of living things. We are pleased to announce a call for papers for a special issue entitled Biodiversity and Poverty Alleviation. Possible topics include but are not limited to: 1) Identifying and quantifying the links between biodiversity conservation, ecosystem services and poverty alleviation (PA); 2) Case studies using biodiversity resources in PA (e.g. resources found in forest and marine ecosystems, farming of much needed wild resources and selected components of biodiversity); 3) Integrating biodiversity conservation into development processes at national, regional and international levels; 4) Importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services in community livelihood and wealth including how community based natural resource management strategies can strengthen communities; 5) Biodiversity for sustainable development, ecosystem and environmental management and PA; 6) Ecosystem and environmental management for PA;

7) Technological innovations and their impacts on biodiversity and PA in rural populations; 8) The role of gender equality and empowerment of women in preserving biodiversity and sustaining economic wellbeing;

9) How biodiversity loss affects the population health of the worlds poor;10) How communities are responding to biodiversity loss and change through adaptation strategies and traditional knowledge; 11) Moving forward on international goals (Millennium Development Goals, the Convention on Biological Diversity) to conserve biodiversity and alleviate poverty; 12) How trade patterns and controls affect biodiversity and poverty;

13) The economic valuation of biodiversity loss and conservation for poverty alleviation; 14) Effective governance for biodiversity conservation at the international, regional, national and local levels. Submissions from all countries are encouraged. This journal receives partial support from the Ontario Trillium Foundation, the International Development Research Centre and other partner organizations. Proposals for papers should be submitted in the form of an abstract (250300 words) that provides relevant background information, an outline of content and main discussion points. Please submit your abstracts by 16 April 2010 to the Managing Editor, Stephen Aitken at aitken@tcbiodiversity.org. A Special Board of Editors will review abstracts and select papers for the issue. Abstract authors will be notified of their status by April 30. Final drafts of selected papers are to be submitted by 25 June. The issue scheduled for publication in August of 2010.

The Biodiversity team looks forward to working with you on this important issue in 2010, the International year of Biodiversity.

UNEP POLICY SERIES United Nations Environment Programme ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty POLICY BRIEF 1 - 2010UNEP promotes environmentally sound practices globally and in its own activities. This publication is printed on 100 per cent chlorine free paper from sustainably managed forests. Our distribution policy aims to reduce UNEPs carbon footprint. DISCLAIMER The views expressed in this Policy Series do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP or contributory organization(s). The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP or contributory organization(s)

concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Table of contents Summary ..................................................................................................................... ................. 1 What is biodiversity and ecosystem services? ............................................................. 2 Interlinkages between Climate Change, Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services ................................................................................................................ 3 Interlinkages between Poverty, Climate Change and Biodiversity................................................................................................................... ............... 5 Ecosystem-based Adaptation................................................................................................ 8 The need to place Biodiversity as the fundamental Unit of Economic Activity................................................................................................................ 10 The Way Forward ..................................................................................................................... 12 Recommendations ....................................................................................................... ............ 13 Summary The rational for this Policy Brief is to make clear the vital benefits of integrating biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management by taking the Ecosystemsbased Adaptation approach along with the Green Economy Initiative to achieve equitable multiple win-win objectives to ensure the continued well-being of human society in the future. Biodiversity is the variety of all life, from genes to species that form the complex interactions of life and habitats that make up ecosystems. Biodiversity is intimately

linked to the earths climate and inevitably to climate change as it is the foundation for the natural processes of climate regulation. Biodiversity and poverty are also inextricably connected. Changes to ecosystems influence both the climate and peoples ability to cope with its adverse impacts. In return, climate change and peoples responses to it, affect biodiversity. Understanding these inter-relationships clearly shows that conserving and managing biodiversity protects the resilience of natural systems and so helps all people, particularly the most vulnerable, to cope with a shifting global climate. This increasing dependency of human society on biodiversity and ecosystems services is occurring at a time when biodiversity is suffering a considerable loss. It is estimated that the current species extinction rate is between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher than it would naturally be 1 . Such extinction rates have already been seen as exceeding the safe limits for a viable human society 2 . Therefore urgent support is needed to develop local solutions to biodiversity loss which also provide benefits for climate change mitigation and adaptation and especially poverty alleviation and economic growth. Towards the end of 2010 there exists a significant opportunity for major players to embrace an integrated solution by tackling in a coordinated fashion these two most important environmental issues of biodiversity loss and climate change. The year 2010 is the International Year of Biodiversity, and in October the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity convene their 10th meeting in Nagoya, Japan. Shortly afterwards, the sixteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to UNFCCC takes place in Mexico to further negotiate strategies to deal with climate change.

UNEP recommends that the CBD be strengthened to optimise biodiversity conservation for climate change mitigation and adaptation and that the UNFCCC builds on the increasing recognition that ecosystems play a vital role in climate regulation. 1 IUCN. See: http://www.iucn.org/what/tpas/biodiversity/ 2 Rockstrm et al (2009) Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 14: 32. See: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32 Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty Key Messages Biodiversity is key to how well people can adapt to climate change. The poor will need to be involved in any planning and decision-making and must ultimately be able to derive sustainable livelihoods from these resources We need to set different policy directions, change incentive structures, reduce or phase out perverse subsidies, and engage business leaders in a vision for a new economy. Holistic economics or economics that

recognize the value of natures services and the costs of their loss is needed to set the stage for a new green economy Environmental limits need to be established in order to ensure society remains within them in order to achieve sustainability. This is based on four principle criteria: long-term environmental effectiveness, equity consideration, cost effectiveness, and, overall institutional compatibility of the policy combinations Ecosystem-Based Adaptation (EBA) is an emerging approach that works with nature to help vulnerable communities and build resilience of their ecosystems and livelihoods being threatened by climate change impacts. It can also generate significant multiple benefits such as social, economic and cultural.

1The objectives of both Conventions are synergistic. Integrated efforts can protect biodiversity, support mitigation and adaptation to climate change, and, crucially, help alleviate poverty. In contrast, the continuing erosion of biological diversity and failures to tackle climate change undermine the foundations of human life support: ecosystems goods and services. UNEP recommends that synergies between the CBD and UNFCCC are optimised for climate regulation, ecosystems services protection and poverty alleviation. There is an urgent need to integrate strategies that link solutions for biodiversity conservation, climate change and human well being. A framework for doing so exists as the Ecosystems-based Adaptation approach. UNEP recommends that Ecosystems-based Adaptation receives substantial funding support and becomes a core component of strategic planning for a sustainable future. What is biodiversity and ecosystem services? Biodiversity is the variety of all forms of life, including genes, species, populations and ecosystems. Biodiversity underpins the essential goods and services that ecosystems provide and has value for current uses, possible future uses (option values), and intrinsic worth. There are between 5- 30 million distinct species on Earth; most are microorganisms and only about 1.75 million have been formally described 3 . Collectively, the interactions of all the components that make up the total global biodiversity set the foundations on which human society has evolved. 3

http://intranet.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/SSC/SSCwebsite/Policy_statements/IUCN_Guidel ines_for_the_Prevention_of_ Biodiversity_Loss_caused_by_Alien_Invasive_Species.pdf Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty Biodiversity is the variety of all forms of life, including genes, species, populations and ecosystems. All ecosystem service s such as the production of food and water; the control of climate and disease; nutrient cycles and crop pollination; all depend on biodiversity. 2Humankind benefits from a multitude of resources and processes that are supplied by natural ecosystems. Collectively, these benefits are known as ecosystem services and include products like clean drinking water and processes such as the decomposition of wastes. While scientists and environmentalists have discussed ecosystem services for decades, these services were popularized and their definitions formalized by the United Nations 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), a four-year study involving more

than 1,300 scientists worldwide 4 . This grouped ecosystem services into four broad categories: provisioning, such as the production of food and water;

regulating, such as the control of climate and disease; 5 . All these services depend on biodiversity. Interlinkages between Climate Change, Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services In its Fourth Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states with very high confidence that human activities since 1750 is the major cause of worldwide trends of global warming. For the next two decades, says the IPCC, about 0.2 C of warming per decade is projected. Among the many knock-on effects are a sea level rise of more than 50 cm by 2100. It is also likely that between 20 and 30 per cent of plant and animal species assessed will be at greater risk of extinction if the rise in global average temperatures exceeds 2-3 C 6 7 . How climate change affects biodiversity supporting, such as nutrient cycles and crop pollination; and cultural, such as spiritual and recreational benefits

The 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) estimates that by the end of this century, climate change will be the main driver of biodiversity loss. Along with predicting a higher risk of species extinctions, the IPCC says that temperature increases up to 3 C are also very likely to trigger substantial changes in the structure and functioning of all ecosystems. Climate change 4 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). 2005. Ecosystems and Human WellBeing: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington. 155pp. 5 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005; Kraft, Valencia, and Ackerly 2008; Gitay and others 2002. 6 IPCC (2007) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report. Summary for Policymakers. See www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf. 7 Fischlin, A. et al. (2007) Ecosystems, their properties, goods, and services. In Climate Change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. M. L. Parry et al. (eds.) .Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 211-272. Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty Many people are using natural resources and

biodiversity, including genetic diversity, as part of the adaptation process. The rural poor already rely heavily on wild food sources and medicinal plants to supplement diets and maintain health. 3 will have a number of impacts on biodiversity, from ecosystem to species level 8 . Perhaps the most obvious is the effect that changes in rainfall distribution, temperature; flooding and sea level rise will have on ecosystem boundaries and the functions within them. As a result of these changes in functions and shifts in boundaries, some ecosystems will expand into new areas, while others will become smaller. Habitats will change as rainfall and temperatures change, and some species will not be able to adapt, leading to a sharp increase in extinction rates. The impacts of climate change on biodiversity will vary from region to region. The most rapid changes in climate are expected in the far north and south and in mountainous regions. These also happen

to be the regions where species are more likely to become trapped, with no alternative habitat to which they can migrate. Species with small fragmented populations, or populations restricted to small areas, are also especially vulnerable to any climatic shifts. Higher water temperatures have already caused devastating losses of biodiversity in coral reefs 9 . Global warming is also causing shifts in the reproductive cycles and growing seasons of certain species, which can in their turn affect how ecosystems function. The equilibrium of ecosystems can also be upset when, for example, insect pests and microbial pathogens previously unknown in a region survive the warmer winters. Migrating species may be affected dramatically by any changes to stopover sites key to their survival, or when seasonal availability of food sources is no longer synchronized with migration times. Using biodiversity to cope with climate change impacts From the IPCC report, scientists agree that even if greenhouse gas emissions were to stabilise soon (an unlikely scenario, given the current increasing rate of emissions, slow place of intergovernmental negotiations on curbing/reducing greenhouse gas emissions) global warming and sea level rise will persist for centuries. This is down to the timescales associated with climate dynamics and feedback processes. So the need to adapt to climate change impacts is inevitable. It is already happening across the globe. Many people are using natural resources and biodiversity, including genetic diversity, as part of the adaptation process. For instance, wild relatives of food crops are used

to breed new varieties that can cope with changing conditions. In many regions of the developing world, the rural poor already rely heavily on wild food sources and medicinal plants to supplement diets and maintain health. Some species are used on a daily basis; others gain in importance during periods of drought or stress. In times of need some farmers may plant crop varieties resistant to floods, drought or saline conditions. A diverse genetic base is key to producing varieties from which such characteristics can be developed. 8 Reid, H. (2006) Climatic change and biodiversity in Europe. Conservation and Society 4(1): 84-101. 9 Leahy, Stephen(2007). Environment: Between a Reef and a Hard Place. NoticiasFinancieras. Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty People living in poor countries are disproportionately vulnerable to the loss of biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services as they soley depend on these services. This dependence means the impact of climate and other environmental changes on biodiversity

and ecosystem services poses a real threat to the livelihoods, food security and health of the poor. 4Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty Changes in priorities and active and adaptive management will be needed to maintain biodiversity under a changing climate. The actions taken must function within environmental limits imposed by resource availability and renewal rates. There is need for the formulation and evaluation of economic and policy mechanisms based on long term

environmental effectiveness, equity, cost effectiveness and Institutional compatibility 5 Conserved ecosystems offer many other services vital for adapting to climate change. Wetlands are important reservoirs for floodwater. Vegetation used as live hedges protects agricultural land from excessive water or wind erosion in times of heavy rainfall or drought. And by stabilising slopes on hillsides, vegetation also reduces the risk of landslides when rain comes in heavy bursts over prolonged periods. Watersheds with intact plant cover slow surface runoff feeding rivers and thus reduce flood risks downstream. Mangroves are coastal buffers renowned for dissipating the energy of waves braking onshore and therefore protecting against cyclone damage to coasts and seaside communities. Interlinkages between Poverty, Climate Change and Biodiversity PPeople living in poor countries are disproportionately vulnerable to the loss of biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. And although they are responsible for emitting the lowest levels of greenhouse gases, they suffer most from the impacts of climate change. Recognizing this, the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) asserts that there are common but differentiated responsibilities for tackling climate change. But along with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), these agreements do not specify the strategies and methods to be used by parties to each agreement to meet their stated aims. While links between climate change, biodiversity and poverty are clear, and there is an obvious imperative to support projects and activities that meet the objectives of all three agreements, in practice these tend to be thin on the ground. And in some cases, activities intended to meet the goals of one agreement may negatively affect the goals of another. As such the integration of objectives can be improved through stronger linkages between Conventions, better research and inter-disciplinary thinking and a wider engagement between the public, governments, agencies and other stakeholders. Geographic location is a key factor in the vulnerability of poor people and poor nations. Many of these countries lie in the regions most at risk from climate change (such as drought-prone sub-Saharan Africa); many of the poor may live in marginal areas such as floodplains or at the foot of unstable hillsides. Poor people also have the fewest choices available to them, and the lowest capacity, for example because of a lack of resources and mobility, to cope with climate change related shocks such as cyclones 10 .

Poor countries and their people also depend heavily on climate-sensitive sectors and natural resources. These include agriculture, fisheries, water supply, animal husbandry, forestry and tourism. As the MA points out, this dependence means the impact of climate and other environmental changes on biodiversity and ecosystem services poses a real threat to the livelihoods, food security and health of the poor. 10 Huq, S., Reid, H., Konate, M. et al. (2004) Mainstreaming adaptation to climate change in Least Developed Countries (LDCs). Climate Policy 4(1): 25-43What can be done? Changes in priorities and active and adaptive management will be needed to maintain biodiversity under a changing climate. In some places, active management will take the form of further improving protection from human interference, while in others conservation may need to include interventions in species and ecosystem processes that are stronger and more hands-on than todays. In all cases biodiversity values must be actively considered in the face of climate change and in the context of competing uses for land or sea. This requires an ongoing process to anticipate how ecosystems will respond to a changing climate while interacting with other environmental modifiers to change the dynamic interactions between species and therefore ecosystem functions. The ability to anticipate such change will always be incomplete and far from perfect, so any

management actions must be within a framework that is robust yet flexible and adaptive. Most importantly, the actions taken must function within environmental limits imposed by resource availability and renewal rates. As such, environmental thresholds need to be established in order to ensure society remains within them in order to achieve sustainability. Thus, there is need for the formulation and evaluation of economic and policy mechanisms based on four principle criteria, including; 1. Long term environmental effectiveness: Environmental effectiveness refers to the degree to which combined development and climate policies stay close to the established thresholds. These thresholds are determined based on societal perception of risks associated with climate change impact and by views on what is considered as dangerous and socially unacceptable 11 . Policy combinations that achieve a state well within biodiversity/environmental goals (thresholds), can be said to have a higher degree of effectiveness and should normally be preferred. The environmental effectiveness of any policy mix will therefore, depend on its coherence. For example, a policy mix that attempts to reduce the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services by focusing only on the forest sector will be less effective than an alternative that considers biodiversity conservation/protection in all sectors. 2. Equity consideration:

In framing actions that functions within the environmental limits and protect biodiversity and ecosystems, the relative distributional impact on economic agents and natural systems must be considered ex ante. These considerations can be split into outcomes and processes. Outcomes in terms of the distribution of impacts and processes in terms of the distribution of responsibilities. In choosing a politically practically workable biodiversity framework, the incidence of the outcomes must be considered to be fair and balanced in order to enjoy wide acceptability. 11 Beg et al;2002. Linkages between climate change sustainable development. Climate Policy, 2: 129-144 Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty EBA encompasses a wide range of strategies that operate at multiple scales: local, national, and regional and through to global. The aim of the EBA is to facilitate climate change adaptation by both society and the environment in harmony

63. Cost effectiveness: The management of ecosystems to conserve biodiversity presents a cost effective method of protection from climate change to all people and environments through strengthening resilience, particularly for vulnerable societies and threatened ecosystems. Protection and sustainable management of the diverse range of ecosystems within the world offer substantial cost effective solutions to climate change mitigation and adaptation, with focused investment in ecosystems management having multiple benefits across a broad spectrum of sectors. Key to this are mechanisms that fully value ecosystems and the services they provide. The fundamental basis of this is that economic activities must not compromise the sustainability of an ecosystem (exceeding thresholds), and therefore balance must be sought within policies to achieve shortterm economic goals and long-term sustainability. 4. Institutional compatibility of the policy combinations. Whilst it would be easy to state that policies combinations need to be better integrated, monitored and regulated, this is not always possible due to political and economic differences (i.e. the Copenhagen Accord was not endorsed by the UNFCCC). Where a greater probability of success in achieving compatibility of policy combinations exists is in fostering a more visible global recognition of environmental issues. At the core of this is the way that the environment is valued

and the extent to which acknowledgement given that all of society depends on biodiversity, ecosystems and the life supporting goods and services they provide. Thus the formulation and evaluation of economic activities and policies must consider as a first principle the effect the activity or policy will have on environmental quality and thus maintain it within safe threshold limits.

Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty Replacing our obsolete economic compass could help economics become part of the solution to reverse our declining ecosystems and biodiversity loss. 7Ecosystem-based Adaptation Ecosystem-Based Adaptation (EBA) is an approach that works with nature to help vulnerable communities build resilience of their ecosystems and livelihoods being threatened by climate change impacts 12 . EBA can also generate significant multiple benefits such as carbon sequestration

and other social, economic and cultural benefits. Healthy ecosystems and their services provide opportunities for sustainable economic prosperity while providing defence against the negative effects of climate change (Figure 1). Fundamentally, EBA is a cost-effective adaptation option that address the four principle criteria above and needs mainstreaming into national adaptation plans. Figure 1. Beating the vicious cycle of poverty, ecosystem degradation and climate change This is achieved through ecosystem management 13 , including sustainable resource use, biodiversity conservation and ecosystem restoration. The ecosystem management approach is supported by many national and international organisations including UNEP, World Bank 14 , IUCN15 , WCMC 16 and many others. 12 IUCN Position Paper, UNFCCC Bangkok meeting, 28th Sept 9th Nov 2009. 13 Ecosystem management can be defined as an integrated process to conserve and improve ecosystem

health that sustains ecosystem services for human well-being. Here the Ecosystem management term is used to encompass ecosystem-based mitigation and adaptation. Ecosystems are defined as encompassing all land and marine based natural and semi-natural systems, and associated land uses including conservation, sustainable livelihoods, pastoralism, agriculture and forestry. 14 See: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ENVIRONMENT/Resources/ESW_EcosystemBased App.pdf 15 See: http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/ecosystem_management/ 16 See: http://www.unep-wcmc.org/EAP/espa.aspx Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty Replacing our obsolete economic compass could help economics become part of the solution to reverse our declining ecosystems and biodiversity loss. 8Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EBA) is a climate change adaptation response that achieves multiple goals:

 Continued support of human wellbeing through sustained biodiversity and ecosystem services provision. Climate change mitigation through ecosystem carbon sequestration capacity. EBA encompasses a wide range of strategies that operate at multiple scales: local, national, and regional and through to global. The aim of the EBA is to facilitate climate change adaptation by both society and the environment in harmony 17 . UNEP is currently developing an EBA programme whose overarching goal is to help vulnerable communities adapt to climate change through good ecosystem management practices, and their integration into global, regional, national and local climate change strategies and action plans. The EBA programme will deliver specific products and services responding to country needs to support EBA mainstreaming through three main overarching components. These are : i. Knowledge Support: This component will also undertake analysis of ecosystem services for adaptation and their economic value, and help convert these results into a knowledge base with which decision-makers can design and implement priority EBA policies and projects. ii. Capacity Building and Demonstration: This component will help create the enabling conditions for implementing EBA options in developing countries, including technology development and diffusion, piloting and demonstration and capacity building. Through technology development and diffusion, participating countries can

access viable technologies for restoration and ecological engineering for adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Through piloting EBA approaches on the ground, and applying the results of knowledge support, countries and communities will be demonstrated with a combination of models including those building on community-based adaptation and micro-credit, making ecological, economic and financial laws work for adaptation. iii. Integration of EBA Options into National Adaptation Plans: TThis component will help pave the way for the integration of EBA into national adaptation plans. A coordinated and integrated approach with institutional structures that are capable of mobilizing different stakeholders will be established through modifying the frameworks and processes that are used to develop or revise policies, programs and projects. The activities will include economic analysis of different EBA options, support for policy 17 http://www.macaulay.ac.uk/copenhagen/summary.html Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty 9Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty setting and legislation, as well as feasibility studies for large-scale investment in EBA projects. This will help build a sustainable policy and investment framework in the participating countries in which EBA can be integrated into national budgetary and investment plans The need to place Biodiversity as the fundamental Unit of Economic Activity

The economic invisibility of nature in our dominant economic model is both a symptom and a root cause of biodiversity loss. We value what we can put a price on, but natures services providing clean air, fresh water, soil fertility, flood prevention, drought control, climate stability, etc - are, mostly, not traded in any markets and not priced. These so-called ecosystem services are all public goods provided free. It is becoming increasingly accepted that the current global economic model of consumption is not sustainable, and that the system of measurement of economic growth compounds pressures on environmental thresholds. Replacing our obsolete economic compass could help economics become part of the solution to reverse our declining ecosystems and biodiversity loss. We therefore need a new compass to set different policy directions, change incentive structures, reduce or phase out perverse subsidies, and engage business leaders in a vision for a new economy. Holistic economics, or economics that recognize the value of natures services and the costs of their loss, is needed to set the stage for a new green economy 18 . The crisis of biodiversity loss can only begin to be addressed in earnest if the values of biodiversity and ecosystem services are fully recognized and represented in decision-making. This may reveal the true nature of the trade-offs being made: between different ecosystem services (food provision or

carbon storage), between different beneficiaries (private gain by some, public loss to many), at different scales (local costs, global benefits) and across different time horizons. When the value of ecosystem services are understood and included within economic accounting, what may have looked like an acceptable trade-off may appear quite unacceptable. Conversely, when benefits that were previously unrecognized become visible (i.e. the role of ecosystems in climate regulation), they become worth preserving. Further to this, investment in ecosystem protection and management can, with appropriate full environmental economic accounting, yield high returns. For 18 Greening the economy refers to the process of reconfiguring businesses and infrastructure to deliver better returns on natural human and economic capital investments, while at the same time reducing green house gas emissions, extracting and using less natural resources, creating less waste and reducing social disparities At a global scale, decisions need to be made within the context of an underpinning rational where environmental protection takes precedence. This requires a fundamental shift in the structure of the

worlds current economic models, where resource consumption is the primary driver which has lead to environmental degradation, biodiversity loss and hence unsustainable societies. 10example, recent research findings 19 show that an annual global investment of $45 billion in protecting ecosystems could deliver an estimated $5 trillion a year in societal benefits, a costbenefit ratio of over 100:1. The establishment of new marine protected areas, resulting in the closure of 20% of total fishing grounds, could result in estimated annual profit losses of $270 million, but would sustain fisheries worth $80-100 billion a year; maintain an estimated 27 million jobs while generating one million new ones, and secure food supplies for over one billion people. Many examples now exist of payment for ecosystem services (PES). Here people who manage or interact in some way with ecosystems receive payments for the benefits provided by the ecosystem to the wider community: In Costa Rica, payments to farmers who conserve forests on their land rather than destroy them for low-earning pasture have become almost a national environment

programme. Soil and water benefits flow to farmlands all around them. And this was funded by a small 3% tax on transport. In India, ecological restoration and water harvesting is paid for by a national rural employment guarantee scheme, employing millions. In San Francisco and New York, ecological infrastructure is the reality: reservoirs and lake watersheds surrounded by well-managed forests provide cities with a freshwater supply. Conversely, on the island of Lombok in Indonesia, the local community pays $0.60 per household per month to a special fund that ensures the sustainable management of their watershed forests so as to protect vital water supplies. These are new economic models for government and business in which both private opportunity and public goods are being created and rewarded by a new partnership between business, citizens, and their government. TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity) has assembled a library of suggestions for policy-makers on how to use good economics to conserve wild nature and herald a society that profits and progresses yet lives in harmony with nature. (TEEB for Policy-Makers, November 2009) 20 . 19 The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) Interim Report 2009. See: http://ec.europa.eu/

environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/ 20 The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) Interim Report 2009. See: http://ec.europa.eu/ environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/ 11 Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and PovertyThe Way Forward Biodiversity and ecosystem services are the foundation of many successful adaptation strategies, especially for poor people. They can also deliver climate change mitigation benefits. But meeting all these objectives can be difficult. Adaptation activities in one sector can compromise those in another, as well as mitigation, biodiversity or poverty objectives. Decisions should therefore be based on good science, an understanding of the full environmental-economic tradeoffs. At the very least, climate change solutions should aim to avoid damaging biodiversity and ecosystem services, increasing inequity and exacerbating poverty. At a global scale, decisions need to be made within the context of an underpinning rational where environmental protection takes precedence. This requires a fundamental shift in the structure of the worlds current economic models, where resource consumption is the primary driver which has lead to environmental degradation, biodiversity loss and hence unsustainable societies. Instead there is need to develop economic models that reverse the market failures of the existing models by fully valuing the environment. They must be able to

balance the capacity of the worlds ecosystems to provide essential services with the basic needs of all sections of human society in an equitable way. Such models need to foster greater individual and global collective responsibility and facilitate a shared equity of resource use. Governments, individuals, bilateral organisations and the private sector should seek to achieve better integration of information, thinking and decision making to ensure that initiatives that meet the objectives of the MDGs, the UNFCCC and the CBD are supported. Currently, however, the bodies responsible for each convention, and the governments and ministers in charge of implementing them, tend to have a sectoral approach, focusing on their own objectives. The synergies between objectives need to be better recognised by governments, who must facilitate change by supporting both topdown and bottom-up initiatives. Similarly businesses and communities need to take advantage of the economic benefits that the ecosystems-based adaptation approach will bring. Only by collectively addressing the multiple issues of climate change, biodiversity loss and poverty in an integrative way will synergistic solutions be developed. 12 Integrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and PovertyIntegrated Solutions for Biodiversity, Climate Change and Poverty Recommendations The CDB needs to be strengthened to optimise the benefits that biodiversity conservation can have for climate change mitigation and adaptation by society. The UNFCCC needs to build upon the progress made at CoP15 in recognising the role that

ecosystems play in regulating our climate. There is need for greater integration between the CBD and UNFCCC to maximise the synergies in environmental protection, not only for climate change, but for poverty alleviation, food and water security and long-term sustainability. The Ecosystems based Adaptation approach must receive substantial funding and international recognition to ensure that it becomes part of the core considerations in strategic planning for a sustainable economic development. These are new economic models for government and business in which both private opportunity and public goods are being created and rewarded by a new partnership between business, citizens, and their government. TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity) has assembled a library of suggestions for policy-makers on how to use good economics to conserve wild nature and herald a society that profits and progresses yet lives in harmony with nature. (TEEB for Policy-Makers, November 2009) . 13This Policy Brief recommends: the The Convention on Biological Diversity needs to be strengthened to optimise

benefits that biodiversity conservation can have for climate change mitigation and adaptation by society. the The UNFCCC needs to build upon the progress made at CoP15 in recognising

role that ecosystems play in regulating our climate. There is need for greater integration between the CBD and UNFCCC to maximise

the synergies in environmental protection, not only for climate change, but for poverty alleviation, food and water security and long-term sustainability. The ecosystems-based adaptation approach must receive substantial funding and international recognition to ensure that it becomes part of the core considerations in strategic planning for a sustainable economic development. 14Acknowledgements: We are grateful to Prof. Mary E. Power of the Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Prof Eugene Takle of Iowa State University, USA, Dr. Jamison Ervin, of the Supporting Country Action for CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas UNDP/GEF/UNOPS Global Project, Dr. Momodou Njie of Blue Gold Solutions, the Gambia, Dr. Clive Mutunga of Population Action International, Washington D.C, USA, Dr. Rafaela Jane P. Delfino of World Agro forestry Center (ICRAF) Philippines, Balakrishna Pisupati, Vijay Samnotra, Mario Boccucci and Levis Kavagi of DEPI/UNEP, for additions and comments on different versions of this paper. This research policy was drafted by: Richard Munang 21 Climate change adaptation Unit Division of Environmental Policy Implementation (DEPI) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Email: Richard.Munang@unep.org Mike Rivington, Macaulay Land Use Research Institute,

Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen. AB15 8QH, Scotland. E-mail: m.rivington@macaulay.ac.uk 21 Corresponding author Jian Liu Chief, Climate Change Adaptation Unit, Division of Environmental Policy Implementation (DEPI) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Email: Jian.liu@unep.org Ibrahim Thiaw Director, Division of Environmental Policy Implementation (DEPI) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Email: Ibrahim.Thiaw@unep.org Tim Kasten Deputy Director, Division of Environmental Policy Implementation (DEPI) United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Email: Tim.Kasten@unep.org 15Do you want to comment on this policy brief ? Join the discussion on the dedicated UNEP Policy Dialogue blog at http://www.unep.org/ecosystemmanagement/Policy/UNEPPOLICYSERIESBLOG/tabid/ 4564/language/en-US/Default.aspx