IPBES (the
Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) is operating
on a shoestring budget to provide a critical service to humanity. But the
funding will need to be renewed in 2020 and there is great uncertainty
regarding the commitments nations will make given the current geopolitical
context. So it’s worth pondering, why—after all—does the world need IPBES?
The usual
argument against IPBES being an essential global institution is that problems
of nature and its benefits to people (biodiversity and ecosystem services) are
local or regional problems, unlike climate change. Without global dynamics,
goes this argument, there’s no need for a global institution. Personally, I have wondered whether this is true. Even as late as mid-September, I wasn't sure if IPBES really was needed.
But problems of
nature are global problems, in three key ways.
Male peacock spider: not only vertebrates are cool (Wiki). Check out this amazing video of a courtship dance. |
First, our
responsibility for nature is global. Our grandchildren will thank us for saving
wildlife and wild spaces wherever they occur. Correspondingly, if we fail to prioritize
this, they will surely blame us for it, whether the extinguished flora and
fauna are tropical rainforests, Arctic tundra, coral reefs, peacock spiders,
tigers or emperor penguins—regardless of whether these wonders fall within our
national borders.
Second, what
happens elsewhere affects us here. ‘Telecoupling’ is real: when Indonesian forest fires associated with
industrial agriculture choked much of Equatorial Asia with smoke and smog, over
100,000 people likely died prematurely in Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia (NYTimes,
ERL).
Smoke from Indonesian forest fires, courtesy of NASA |
When expanding deserts in
China—due to overgrazing, ‘bad cultivation’ and deforestation—allowed winds
to pick up thousands of tons of fine sediment, people halfway across the world
experienced yellow dust. This dust, which has been found in New Zealand and the
French Alps, is estimated to cost Korea and Japan billions of dollars each year
(Conversation).
And the ongoing improper handling of plastics
in many nations has resulted in a massive gyre of plastic waste in the Pacific
Ocean and our seafood being laced with plastic nodules—such that seafood eaters
are likely consuming many thousands of pieces every year (Telegraph,
Scientific
Reports). Similarly, industrial processes have resulted in
high levels of mercury, PCBs, and dioxins in many fish species, especially
predators like swordfish, salmon, tuna, and mackerel. All that is just a
handful of the ways that what happens far away matters locally.
Ocean plastics in Hawai'i (NOAA) |
Third, what we do
here drives what happens there. Have you eaten a candy bar recently? Some other
processed food (much of which contains palm oil, whose production fuels the
aforementioned land-use change and fires in Indonesia)? Then you’re complicit
in the Indonesian fires. Do you eat imported meat and rice? If so, you’re
partly responsible for the dust storms from Asia, as global markets spread our
demand across distant sites of production. Do you use plastic products or
anything with plastic production? Then you, like me, are complicit in the mass
plasticization of the oceans.
Nature problems
are global problems, so we need a concerted global effort to synthesize and
advance the understanding of these problems—and their ultimate causes. By doing
this, IPBES can enable appropriate responses among governments, NGOs, and the
private sector. And when responses aren’t appropriate, this rigorously synthesized
global information will enable other actors to hold their feet to the fire.
Governments: keep funding IPBES. In fact, double your contribution, or more.
Clearly, IPBES can't solve these problems alone--and if you know me and CoSphere you know I think there are solutions to all these problems--but IPBES has a crucial role to play, as I'll explain in subsequent blog posts.
Clearly, IPBES can't solve these problems alone--and if you know me and CoSphere you know I think there are solutions to all these problems--but IPBES has a crucial role to play, as I'll explain in subsequent blog posts.
Readers: if you
see the benefits of IPBES given the global nature of these problems, please
like and share this page with the #fundIPBES hashtag. As a coordinating lead author of IPBES's Global Assessment and with other IPBES authors, I will use your support to convey the public support for continued and enhanced funding
for IPBES to governments around the world.
PS, See my earlier posts about the IPBES conceptual framework, Intense Politics of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and how IPBES could make ecosystem service assessments useful. KC
No comments:
Post a Comment