A sustainable global future for people and nature is still achievable, but it requires transformative change with rapid and far-reaching actions of a type never before attempted, building on ambitious emissions reductions.
The Bramble Cay melomys (Melomys rubicola) is the first mammal
believed to have gone extinct as a direct result of climate change.
Endemic to the island of Bramble Cay in the Great Barrier Reef, its
habitat was destroyed by rising sea levels. (Photo credit: Henry
Gonzalez/Flickr)
The natural world is undergoing two enormous crises that are
currently threatening the natural world: climate change and
biodiversity loss. These crises are intertwined. Climate change is
currently impacting
19 percent of species listed as threatened on the IUCN Red List
of Threatened Species, the world’s catalog of endangered species. We
are currently experiencing the Sixth Extinction, the sixth major
extinction event in Earth’s history and the only one caused by human
activity. The Sixth Extinction is not only
itself accelerating—it is also accelerating climate change,
creating a destructive feedback loop. Now scientists are beginning
to understand that another kind of
destructive feedback loop is happening: Our own efforts to
protect the climate could actually harm biodiversity.
On June 10, two separate United Nations bodies—the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Intergovernmental
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
(IPBES)—released a
joint report that they hope will alter the way society is
tackling these crises. The report is the result of a four-day
virtual workshop convened by the Scientific Steering Committee
assembled by IPBES and IPCC and attended by 50 of the world’s
preeminent climate and biodiversity experts who examined how climate
and biodiversity policies and strategies relate to each other, work
at odds with each other, and can be dovetailed to maximize positive
impacts.
The report’s authors call for a “new conservation paradigm [that]
would address the simultaneous objectives of a habitable climate,
self-sustaining biodiversity, and a good quality of life for all.
New approaches would include both innovation, as well as the
adaptation and upscaling of existing approaches.”
Within the scientific community, discussions about climate and
biodiversity are often separate, creating silos of information that
are ultimately not helpful in solving these interrelated dilemmas.
(Case in point: The UN joint report represents the first-ever
collaboration between the two intergovernmental science-policy
bodies.) The report found that policies have generally addressed the
two issues independently of each other, which has led to missed
opportunities that can maximize efforts on both fronts while meeting
global development goals.
“Human-caused climate change is increasingly threatening nature and
its contributions to people, including its ability to help mitigate
climate change. The warmer the world gets, the less food, drinking
water and other key contributions nature can make to our lives, in
many regions,” said Professor Hans-Otto Pörtner, co-chair of the
Scientific Steering Committee. “Changes in biodiversity, in turn,
affect climate, especially through impacts on nitrogen, carbon and
water cycles.”
One of the ways that society can protect both the climate and the
planet’s biodiversity is to preserve and restore land and marine
ecosystems that are rich in both carbon and species. By leaving such
regions untouched by human development—or bringing them back to
their natural state—the carbon stored in them remains out of the
atmosphere, where it would contribute to global warming, and the
species that live there would benefit from healthy, functioning
habitats. In addition, by leaving forests intact, for example, human
society would continue to
benefit from the ecosystem services they provide, like
regulating floods, protecting coasts, enhancing the quality of water
resources, preventing soil erosion and supporting plant pollination.
The report found that reducing deforestation and forest degradation
can contribute to lowering annual greenhouse gas emissions, by as
much as 5.8 metric gigatons of carbon dioxide every year.
An increase in sustainable agricultural and forestry practices—which
would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase carbon sequestration
and enhance biodiversity—is also a way to tackle both issues. By
improving the way farmlands are managed, particularly by conserving
soil quality and reducing the use of fertilizer, we could prevent as
much as 6 metric gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions every year,
according to the report.
The report’s authors point out that while the creation of protected
areas has been essential for species protection, these areas are not
nearly enough to prevent the rapid decline of species on a planetary
scale, with only a paltry 15 percent of land and 7.5 percent of the
ocean currently protected. And even in many of those areas, laws are
not properly enforced. “Not only are protected areas too small on
aggregate (and often individually), but they are also frequently
sub-optimally distributed and interconnected, inadequately resourced
and managed, and at risk of downgrading,” the report states.
In April 2019, a group of 19 prominent scientists published the
“Global Deal for Nature” (GDN), a “time-bound, science-driven
plan to save the diversity and abundance of life on Earth,” which,
when paired with the Paris Climate Agreement, is meant to “avoid
catastrophic climate change, conserve species, and secure essential
ecosystem services.” The GDN’s main objective is to conserve
“30×30”: 30 percent of the Earth in its natural state by 2030. The
idea has become an international rallying cry, with 50 nations
joining the movement to defend big swaths of intact ecosystems from
exploitation, extraction and development.
The Wyss Foundation, a private charitable foundation based in
Washington, D.C., “dedicated to… empower[ing] communities… and
strengthen[ing] connections to the land,” has joined forces with
National Geographic to launch the Wyss Campaign for Nature—“a $1
billion investment to help [nations], communities, [and] Indigenous
peoples” mobilize to achieve the 30×30 goal. The campaign has
launched a public petition urging immediate action to protect those
ecosystems that have not yet been completely despoiled by the
unrelenting expansion of humanity. “Protecting 30 percent of our
entire planet by 2030 (30×30) is an ambitious but achievable goal,”
the campaign says. “To achieve it, all countries must embrace the
goal and contribute to it; Indigenous rights must be respected; and
conservation efforts must be fully funded.”
SSimilarly, the
UN report calls for the “external recognition of Indigenous
peoples’ and community conserved territories and areas (ICCA),
initiated, designed, and governed by Indigenous communities,” as
well as “enhanc[ing] financing for nature” through a “[s]ubstantial
upscaling” of financial resources.
The report also brings up concerns that some climate change
mitigation strategies can actually harm biodiversity. For example,
growing corn for biofuel or burying captured carbon requires
land-use changes that would reduce or compromise wildlife habitats.
(Conversely, the scientists did not find any species protection
measures that had a negative impact on the climate.)
“The evidence is clear: a sustainable global future for people and
nature is still achievable, but it requires transformative change
with rapid and far-reaching actions of a type never before
attempted, building on ambitious emissions reductions,” said
Pörtner. “Solving some of the strong and apparently unavoidable
trade-offs between climate and biodiversity will entail a profound
collective shift of individual and shared values concerning
nature—such as moving away from the conception of economic progress
based solely on GDP growth, to one that balances human development
with multiple values of nature for a good quality of life, while not
overshooting biophysical and social limits.”
SSimon Lewis, chairman of global change science at University College
London, did not participate in the UN report,
but he called it “an important milestone.” “Finally the world’s
bodies that synthesize scientific information on two of the most
profound 21st-century crises are working together,” he said.
“Halting biodiversity loss is even harder than phasing out fossil
fuel use.”
Reynard Loki is a writing fellow at the Independent Media Institute, where he serves as the editor and chief correspondent for Earth | Food | Life. He previously served as the environment, food and animal rights editor at AlterNet and as a reporter for Justmeans/3BL Media covering sustainability and corporate social responsibility. He was named one of FilterBuy’s Top 50 Health & Environmental Journalists to Follow in 2016. His work has been published by Yes! Magazine, Salon, Truthout, BillMoyers.com, CounterPunch, EcoWatch and Truthdig, among others.