Ryan Wills for New Scientist
Richard Branson, Jane Goodall and Edward Norton might seem like an unlikely trio. However, in 2012, at the Earth Summit in Brazil, they came together to advocate for the valuation of nature as a means to prevent its destruction. Goodall, renowned for her studies on chimps, expressed mixed feelings about this approach, emphasizing the importance of maintaining reverence for the natural world for future generations.
Environmental scientist and anthropologist Daniel Suarez from Middlebury College in Vermont explains the ambivalence felt by biologists towards the concept of “ecosystem services,” which aims to assign monetary value to natural resources. While the intention was to align with financial markets and corporate executives, the desired positive impact on wildlife populations has not materialized as expected.
Suarez delves into the rise and fall of the ecosystem services approach in his book “Biologists Unite,” shedding light on the challenges faced by conservationists in implementing this strategy. Despite the initial enthusiasm and widespread adoption of the concept, the conservation outcomes have not met the lofty expectations set forth.
Understanding Ecosystem Services:
Daniel Suarez:
Ecosystem services refer to the benefits derived from ecosystems, such as the various advantages provided by forests, including timber, water filtration, carbon sequestration, and recreational opportunities. By quantifying these benefits, conservationists aim to demonstrate the value of preserving ecosystems over exploiting them for short-term gains.
The concept gained popularity in the late 1990s, with a surge in scientific research and efforts to integrate ecosystem services into decision-making processes. Despite widespread support from biologists and conservationists, the efficacy of this approach in driving meaningful conservation actions has been limited.
Challenges and Limitations:
The ecosystem services framework faced criticism for reducing nature to economic terms and overlooking intrinsic values. Biologists, while recognizing the flaws in this approach, felt compelled to adopt it due to the lack of viable alternatives within existing political and economic structures.
Despite the initial optimism surrounding ecosystem services, conservation efforts have not yielded the desired results, with global wildlife populations continuing to decline at an alarming rate. The failure to harness market forces and address underlying power dynamics has hindered the effectiveness of this conservation strategy.
Rethinking Conservation Strategies:
Biologists are now exploring more holistic and transformative approaches to biodiversity conservation, shifting focus towards biodiversity justice and building alliances with diverse stakeholders. By engaging with critical scholars and marginalized communities, conservationists aim to address the root causes of environmental degradation and drive systemic change.
By moving away from traditional market-based approaches like ecosystem services and embracing more inclusive and participatory strategies, biologists can work towards a more sustainable and equitable future for biodiversity conservation.
Conclusion:
Reflecting on the limitations of ecosystem services, biologists are reevaluating their conservation practices and seeking alternative pathways to address the global biodiversity crisis. By challenging power dynamics, prioritizing biodiversity justice, and fostering collaboration across diverse groups, conservationists aim to create a more effective and inclusive approach to conservation.
How You Can Support Biodiversity Justice:
As individuals who value nature, supporting biodiversity justice entails advocating for more equitable and sustainable conservation practices. By engaging with marginalized communities, promoting environmental awareness, and demanding accountability from decision-makers, you can contribute to a more holistic and impactful approach to biodiversity conservation.
Topics:
