Reconstructing Biodiversity

Stock Photo
Stock photo

In what can only be described as a well funded and coordinated effort, biodiversity is in the news again.

…the financial value of ‘ecosystem services’ is increasingly guiding policy.

I find the idea of this almost too ridiculous to comment on. About all I can say is whatever guiding policy is developed, it shouldn’t interfere with real work others are trying to get done. What’s been done so far has been so clumsy, it doesn’t seem likely anything useful will emerge, but there’s still a lot of potential for destroying ecosystems and interfering with people’s work. A top down approach like this will never succeed, and time is precious at the moment. It’s really an imperative that efforts like this fail as quickly as possible, so the world can move on to something that works.

Mangrove Forests

Consider for example the Bezos Earth Fund recent contribution to the WWF in order to restore mangrove forests. While I don’t know the details of this particular contribution, I think in general this is the worst kind of solution. Certainly nothing is going to be gained by planting a new forest where one used to be, without addressing the causes of the deforestation in the first place. A better overall approach might be to focus on preserving the mangrove forests that remain, or community building in general.

The WWF is not in the business of community building, but a healthy forest can’t exist without a healthy community having a vested interest in it. A healthy mangrove forest is much more than planting a bunch of mangrove trees, and biodiversity in general needs to be considered. The community needs much more than a few $15/hr jobs that last a short time during planting, and maybe come back at harvest time when it’s time to export the wood products. If the mangrove forest is owned by a corporation, it’s going to contribute to the problem of land grabbing, and put land ownership beyond the means of many people. No one is going to care about a forest if they don’t own it.

Building Communities

A healthy community needs universal health care. Everyone needs enough money to buy what they need, on a level that’s ideally middle class. The forest and local economy then needs to be developed, and produce products and services for people to spend this money on, like food, housing, energy, clothing and so on. At the beginning, and times of crisis, it’s probably going to mean direct cash payments to individuals and small businesses, much in the same way many governments are providing COVID relief. The costs of this needs to be paid for either by donations made by wealthy people, or taxes imposed on them. The long term problems will never be solved without reducing the big gaps between rich and poor.

Land needs to be given to members of the community. This might be made available for purchase at a reasonable price, or for example in the form of 100 year land grants. These land grants could be renewed if the land continued to be put to good use.

The focus of these forests needs to be producing sustainable products for local consumption. This means legalizing and eliminating administrative and financial burdens associated with these products. For example seed laws need to be eliminated so people can grow their own food and save their own seeds. Patents, IPR and regulations need to be eliminated that interfere with day to day needs and affairs.

In order for communities around the world to support one another, laws that interfere with this need to be eliminated. Biodiversity needs to be maintained in-situ, in multiple locations independently, and needs to be able to move and be used freely around the world. There should be no central ‘doomsday vault’ whose existence means other collections need to be destroyed. Of course genuine plant health issues need to be considered, but when these issues don’t exist, they shouldn’t be regulated.

Bottom up approach

Of course biodiversity issues are all more complex than what’s laid out here, but attempts at a top down approach need to stop. Paying governments or corporations for ‘ecosystem services’ is not going to solve any problems, or make anyone care. It’s time to start on a bottom up approach, beginning with basic human needs, and progressing to helping people take care of their own environments.

Leave a Reply

Anonymous comments are welcome, but it's still nice if you leave a name so we have something to call you. Name, Email and Website fields are all optional.

Pretty much anything goes except spam, off-topic comments and attempts to intimidate others. Very short comments that don't show creative thought, or contribute significantly to the discussion, may be considered spam.

Most comments are automatically approved. If you don't see your comment within 24 hours please get in touch.

Cookies must be enabled in your browser to leave a comment, because we use them to verify you aren't a robot.