Rapid Biodiversity Loss Continues In Absence Of Political Action And Accurate Assessments of Ecosystem Values
Finding ways to value ecosystem health economically and to engage the world’s indigenous peoples in the process is key to saving biological diversity, a Worldwatch author suggests in the Institute’s most recent book. Such efforts are all the more urgent because the addition of more plant and animal species to lists of those threatened or endangered shows no signs of slowing down, despite rising public awareness of the importance of biodiversity
This World Biodiversity Day (May 22), Worldwatch Institute is raising awareness of biodiversity losses worldwide and what individuals and institutions can do to confront these trends. The current rate of species extinction is up to 1,000 times above the Earth’s normal extinction rate, a level of loss that has not occurred since the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. The Worldwatch Institute, in its recently released report State of the World 2012: Moving Toward Sustainable Prosperity, highlights the threats to biodiversity and methods for combating the exploitation and degradation of ecosystems and their services.
From 1980 to 2008, an average of 52 species per year moved one category closer to extinction on the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Endangered Species—-a rate that shows no signs of slowing. Although mass extinctions have occurred on Earth throughout geologic time, the current loss of biodiversity is the first to be caused overwhelmingly by a single species: humans. The five principal pressures causing biodiversity loss are habitat change, overexploitation, pollution, invasive alien species, and climate change, all of which are almost exclusively human driven.
“The current model of consumer societies is destroying the planet and its resources,” said Bo Normander, Director of Worldwatch Institute Europe and a contributing author to State of the World 2012. “This must change in order for the planet to sustain future generations.”
At the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, leaders made a commitment to preserve biological resources by signing the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), but there remains a fundamental lack of political will to act on biodiversity threats. In 2002, the CBD promised “a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss” by 2010, yet within those eight years, most countries failed to meet their targets.
To combat the loss of Earth’s natural capital, scientists strive to assign concrete values to natural resources with the hope that an economic appreciation of ecosystem services may facilitate improved planning and management of Earth’s systems. Yet progress on developing accurate, straightforward, and widely accepted measures for assessing ecosystem values remains slow.
“Accurate valuation of ecosystem services is vital to create greater accountability and awareness of the ecological impact of our actions,” said Erik Assadourian, Worldwatch senior fellow and State of the World 2012 project co-director. “By understanding ecosystem services in monetary or physical terms, leaders can assess and improve the sustainability of their policies.”
Current international practices discount future generations by effectively valuing ecosystem services at zero. Such undervaluing is often a result of society’s ignorance of the full benefits that humans derive from an intact ecosystem. Thus, individuals make decisions based on the immediate financial gains of logging a forest, for example, instead of considering the “invisible” benefits of the forest, such as carbon sequestration, flood protection, and habitat for pollinators.
Valuing ecosystems and their services is difficult as knowledge is limited by the complexity of environmental systems. Many linkages between organisms are yet to be discovered, and slight perturbations may have dramatic, unforeseen consequences. Despite these challenges, scientists and politicians attempt to frame the benefits provided by ecosystems using relatable monetary or physical indices. The two most common methods are to create a common asset trust, which “propertizes” the public good without privatizing ecosystems; and to pay for ecosystem services, such as when farmers are paid to leave land fallow for improved soil health.
In State of the World 2012, Worldwatch provides several recommendations for enhancing ecosystem service valuation, including:
Manage ecosystem services on an appropriate scale: Ecosystem services must be evaluated on spatial and temporal scales, in order to determine which institution can effectively manage that ecosystem. Collaboration between scales of government and those managing the services is vital.
Include the global poor in valuation: The world’s poor and indigenous groups rely heavily on natural resources and common goods for sustenance and livelihood. Many attempts at valuing ecosystem services, such as designating a forest as a preserved trust, have excluded indigenous groups from their traditional sources of food and fuel—-an approach that not only is unjust, but will also undermine the long-term success of these efforts.
In addition to these approaches to valuation, Worldwatch champions initiatives that protect biodiversity, such as urban gardening and beekeeping, inclusive forest protection, and the creation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), or zones in the world’s oceans or coastal waters where activities like fishing and mining are strictly regulated. These added protections increase biodiversity within the MPA, which in turn enriches the surrounding waters and ecosystems. Despite the known advantages of MPAs, they protect only 0.8 percent of the world’s oceans.
Worldwatch applauds these efforts to combat the loss of global biodiversity. But to truly protect biodiversity and value ecosystem services effectively, multinational cooperation is required. Worldwatch’s State of the World 2012, released in April 2012, focuses on steps in biodiversity protection and other areas that can be taken at Rio+20, the 20-year follow-up to the historic 1992 Rio Earth Summit, to make progress toward sustainable development.
Add To Reddit
Obama At The White House Correspondence Dinner
So good.
Add To Reddit Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill’s Effects On Deep-Water Corals
Scientists are reporting new evidence that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill has affected marine life in the Gulf of Mexico, this time species that live in dark ocean depths–deepwater corals.
The research used a range of underwater vehicles, including the submarine Alvin, to investigate the corals. The findings are published this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
The scientists used a method known as comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography to determine the source of the petroleum hydrocarbons found.
The lead author of the paper, chemist Helen White of Haverford College in Pennsylvania, is part of a team of researchers led by Charles Fisher of Penn State University (PSU).
The group includes Erik Cordes from Temple University, and Timothy Shank and Christopher German from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), which operates the submersible Alvin.
Fisher, Cordes, Shank and German are co-authors of the paper, along with other scientists from WHOI, Penn State, Temple and the U.S. Geological Survey.
“The biological communities in the deep Gulf of Mexico are separated from human activity at the surface by 4,000 feet of water,” says White.
“We would not expect deep-water corals to be affected by a typical oil spill. But the sheer magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill makes it very different from a tanker running aground and spilling its contents.
Because of the unprecedented nature of the spill, its effects are more far-reaching than those from smaller spills on the surface.”
The study grew out of a research cruise in October 2010 that was part of a Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration project.
Using the remotely-operated vehicle (ROV) Jason II, the team initially looked at nine sites more than 20 kilometers from the Macondo well.
The researchers found deep-water coral communities unharmed there.
But when the ROV explored another area 11 kilometers to the southwest of the spill site, the team was surprised to find coral communities covered in a brown flocculent material and showing signs of tissue damage.
“We discovered the site during the last dive of the three-week cruise,” says Fisher.
“As soon as the ROV got close enough to the community for the corals to come into clear view, it was obvious that something was wrong. There was too much white and brown, and not enough color on the corals and brittle stars.”
Once the scientists were close enough to zoom in on a few coral colonies, “there was no doubt that this was something we had not seen anywhere else in the Gulf,” says Fisher. “This is what we had been on the lookout for, but were hoping not to see.”
The coral communities were at a depth of 4,300 feet in close proximity to the Macondo well, which had been capped three months earlier after spilling an estimated 160 million gallons of oil into the Gulf.
At the time the damaged corals were spotted, the effects could not be directly linked to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
Then in December, 2010, the scientists set out on a second research cruise to the Gulf.
A National Science Foundation (NSF) RAPID grant funded their return. NSF RAPID awards allow scientists to respond quickly to issues such as natural disasters–in this case, the oil spill.
“Through the RAPID award,” says Rodey Batiza of NSF’s Division of Ocean Sciences, “the researchers were able to analyze the oil spill’s effect on the area’s deep-sea corals, and compare changes in the corals’ condition over a relatively short time-period.”
It’s easy to see the effect of oil in surface waters, “but this was the first time we were diving to the seafloor to look at the effects on deep-sea ecosystems,” says White.
The team used the autonomous underwater vehicle Sentry to map and photograph the ocean floor, and the submersible Alvin to get a better look at the distressed corals.
Alvin holds a pilot and two passengers, and is equipped with viewports and cameras.
Alvin also has robotic arms that can manipulate instruments to collect samples. During six dives in Alvin, whose manipulator claws were modified with a cutting blade, the team collected sediments and samples of the corals and filtered material from the corals for analysis.
“Collecting samples from the deep ocean is incredibly challenging, and Alvin is crucial to this kind of work,” says White.
“The primary aim of the research was to determine the composition of the brown flocculent material covering the corals, and the source of any petroleum hydrocarbons present,” says White.
Because oil can naturally seep from cracks in the floor of the Gulf, pinpointing the source of petroleum hydrocarbons in Gulf samples can be challenging, especially since oil is made up of a complex mixture of chemical compounds.
However, there are slight differences in oils that can be used to trace their origin.
To identify the oil found in the coral communities, White worked with Christopher Reddy and Robert Nelson at WHOI using an advanced technique called comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography, pioneered by Reddy and Nelson for use in oil spill research.
The method, which separates oil compounds by molecular weight, allows scientists to “fingerprint” oil and determine its source.
This petroleum analysis, coupled with a review of 69 images from 43 corals at the site performed by Pen-Yuan Hsing of PSU, yielded evidence that the coral communities were affected by oil from the Macondo spill.
“These findings will have a significant effect on deep-water drilling, and on the monitoring of oil spills in the future,” White says.
“Ongoing research in the Gulf will improve our understanding of the resilience of these isolated coral communities and the extent to which they are affected by human activity.
“Oil had a visible effect on the corals, and it’s important to determine whether they can rebound.”
Add To Reddit Calling Radicalism By Its Name
This is amazing, watch the entire thing.
More analysis here. Obama finally sets aside his dream of bipartisanship and calls it like it is. The Republicans are misguided, and care only about the rich, if we continue to allow them to do what they are doing we will decline as a nation.
Add To Reddit Climate Concern Rises In The East
A new study from the Carbon Trust reveals a divide between Generation Y’s1attitude to carbon reduction in the East and West. The study, which questioned over 2,500 young people aged 18-25, across five continents in Brazil, China, South Africa, South Korea, UK and the USA, sought to understand whether tomorrow’s consumers are concerned about climate change and will favour brands that reduce their carbon emissions.
The research, which was commissioned by the Carbon Trust and conducted by TNS, reveals that Generation Y in China is leading the call for brands to reduce their impact on the environment. 83% of young people questioned in China say they would be more loyal to a brand if they could see it was reducing its carbon footprint, compared to 73% in Korea, 55% in the UK and 57% in the USA. 60% of Chinese young adults who participated in the research say they would stop buying a product if its manufacturer refused to commit to measuring and reducing its carbon footprint, followed by 57% in Brazil, 53% in Korea and 35% and 36% in the US and UK respectively.
Tom Delay, Chief Executive of the Carbon Trust, comments, “These new findings are startling. 60% of young adults questioned in China would stop buying a product if its manufacturer refused to commit to measuring and reducing its carbon footprint, compared to just 35% of those in the U.S. Perhaps it is the Chinese, and not the U.S. consumer, that really holds the key to unlocking the mass demand for the new low carbon products necessary to deliver an environmentally sustainable economy. If global brands don’t build international carbon reduction strategies even faster, they risk missing out on the spending power of emerging economies.”
There is also evidence that young adults want brands to be clearly accountable for their action on carbon. 81% of those questioned in Brazil said companies should be obliged to provide proof of their policy to reduce their carbon footprint, higher than any other nation. 68% of those surveyed worldwide want to see companies’ carbon impact quantified by an independent organisation. This is highest in China at 84% and lowest in the USA at 55%. Across all the markets, on average a third of young consumers (33%) say they are prepared to buy a more expensive product if it has a lower carbon footprint.
When asked which products and categories can do the most to reduce their carbon footprint 68% of young consumers cited consumer electronics companies in the top three, followed by consumer healthcare brands (50%), clothes manufacturers and retailers (50%), and food manufacturers and retailers (48%).
Through using its carbon reduction and footprinting services, Carbon Trust customers around the world have put £3.7 billion on their bottom line and cut their carbon emissions by 38 million tonnes.
“Carbon footprinting makes perfect business sense. We are increasingly advising businesses overseas, and international brands, on their carbon reduction strategies, as the financial and reputational benefits of lowering emissions go global,” says Delay.
Later this week, the Carbon Trust will launch its Standard in Korea and announce the first four Asian companies to receive the Carbon Trust Standard for reducing their organisational carbon footprints. And today it opens a novel new exhibition in London to showcase company action on carbon. The world’s first ‘Carbon Footprinting’ Gallery, will explore the proactive steps global brands, including Tesco, Danone, Manchester United and BT, are taking to lower their carbon footprint. The exhibition takes place at the Future Gallery in London from 2nd April – 4th April.
Key Statistics from the Research
Across the six markets, the research suggests that…
- 78% want their favourite brands to help reduce their carbon footprint. This is highest in China (88%), followed by South Africa (86%), Brazil (84%), Korea (81%) and USA and UK (66%)
- 70% would be more loyal to a brand if they could see it is reducing its carbon footprint. This is highest in China at 83%, followed by Brazil at 77%
- 68% of young adults questioned globally would like to see companies’ carbon impact quantified by an independent organisation – this is highest in China at 84%and lowest in the USA at 55%, in the UK it is 56%
- Young adults believe consumer electronics (68%), consumer healthcare brands (50%),clothes manufacturers and retailers (50%),and food manufacturers and retailers (48%),have the greatest responsibility to reduce carbon
- 46% would find carbon footprinting on packaging useful and it would influence their purchase. This rises to 63%in Brazil, 53%in China, 52% South Africa.33%in the UK and 34%in the USA would find it useful
- 33% would buy a more expensive product if it had a lower carbon footprint – of those prepared to spend more, they would be prepared to pay a mean average of 28% more for lower carbon products
- 29% of young adults globally want to reduce their carbon footprint but are confused about how to go about it
- 28% of young adults globally are trying to reduce their carbon footprint but feel they could do more and 21% feel they are doing their bit to reduce their carbon footprint
Add To Reddit 
RSS XML Feed
