In addition to the COP conferences on climate change there is a parallel set of conferences focused on biodiversity. They don’t usually attract as much publicity as the climate change conferences but they are still incredibly important if we really want to protect the living planet.
Globally, wildlife populations are in significant decline, plunging by two-thirds over the past 50 years, because of human overconsumption, population growth and intensive agriculture. (Living Planet Report 2020). As well as what we normally think of as “wildlife”, the decline is impacting complex ecosystems like soil organisms and the pollination process.
The recent COP15 Biodiversity Conference at the end of 2022, included amongst its targets the eye-catching agreement to protect 30% of the planet for nature by 2030 (30 by 30). This was cited as an historic agreement and was strongly supported by the UK with only the US and the Vatican failing to sign up for this target.
Of course the devil is in the details. Is it a global target or a country target? If it’s a global target, are richer countries with less biodiversity going to pay poorer countries sufficiently to preserve their nature?
There is also a lot of disagreement around what “protected for nature” means. So at the moment the Government would argue that the existing National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and other protected areas comprise more than 25% of land in England. However, the Wildlife & Countryside Link (the umbrella organisation for the leading wildlife and countryside organisations) argues that only about 5% of land is well protected and managed for nature.
Devoting 30% of the land and sea to wildlife does seem like a good way forward. In order to make this work there needs to be a common agreement on the management, monitoring and condition of land and sea that counts against the 30% target.
The UK has one of the most detailed understandings of the state of nature in their own country. We have a very strong scientific community. We have amazing organisations that support and campaign for nature such as the National Trust (5.4 million members), the RSPB ( 1.2 million members) and the various Wildlife Trusts (over 900k members). We also have some of the largest citizen science exercises in the world such as the Big Garden Birdwatch in January and the Big Butterfly Count in July.
Unfortunately, of the G7 countries, the UK also has the lowest level of biodiversity as we had already lost many species by the 1970s. Roughly 15% of remaining species have been threatened with extinction since then. The picture is of course mixed: 26% of species have actually increased since 1970 whilst 41% have decreased (State of Nature Report 2019).
A number of long-term targets for species abundance were recently announced as part of the commitment laid down in the Environment Act of 2021. Most commentators feel these targets lack ambition and an understanding of the jeopardy of the situation that we are facing.
As the RSPB puts it: the question we have to ask ourselves is are we going to ensure that we keep once common species, like Song Thrushes, common and protect our most threatened wildlife, like Turtle Doves, from extinction.
Comments