InQuire www.inquiremedia.co.uk
SPA ‘Highly Commended’ Best Publication 2019
Ecosystem collapse threatens us all
“Your campus, your voice” Monday 2 November 2020 16.3
Sustainable fashion
Lifestyle page 9
Govt vs. Arts
By Ben Mott Newspaper Science and Technology Editor A new report by Swiss Re has revealed that one-fifth of nations worldwide are at risk of ecosystem collapse, with potentially crippling economic consequences. Based on analysis from a newly developed index, the Swiss Re Institute has uncovered highly concerning trends in biodiversity declines and the economic impact collapsing ecosystems could have. The insurance firm’s report examined the status of biodiversity and ecosystem services across the globe to reach these conclusions. Biodiversity and ecosystem services (BES) are the benefits humans obtain from the natural world, and the provision of these services is dependent on often delicately balanced compositions of living organisms. Focusing on 10 key ecosystem services highlighted by scientists — including provision of clean water and air, food, timber, pollination, fertile soil, erosion control, and coastal protection, as well as a measure of habitat intactness — only one in seven countries assessed had intact ecosystems representing over 30% of land area. Countries were considered at risk of ecosystem collapse if more than 30% of land area ecosystems were considered fragile. Developing countries that have a heavy dependence on agricultural sectors, such as Kenya or Nigeria, are susceptible to BES shocks from a range of biodiversity and ecosystem issues, the report finds. Among G20 economies, South Africa and Australia top the rankings of fragile BES. The well-known impact of water scarcity is a driver for these countries, alongside factors such as costal protection and pollination. Brazil and Indonesia enjoy the highest percentage of intact ecosystems within the G20, however the countries’ strong economic dependency on natural resources highlights the importance of sustainable development and conservation to the long-term lifespan of their economies Initially created as a way to assess ecosystem risks for business insurance premiums, the index’s use will also extend to allowing businesses and governments to factor biodiversity and ecosystems into their economic decision making, according to Jeffrey Bohn, the institute’s chief research officer.
In a press release, Christian Mumenthaler, Group CEO, added that “there is a clear need to assess the state of ecosystems so that the global community can minimise further negative impact on economies across the world. This important piece of work provides a data-driven foundation for understanding the economic risks of deteriorating biodiversity and ecosystems”. So, what are these risks: what do these findings actually mean, and how has the situation become so severe? According to the report, biodiversity and ecosystem services (BES) provide 55% of global GDP each year – which equates to 41.7 trillion USD. Attributing monetary value has drawn criticism for “commercialising” life forms which possess inherent value, but it is arguably the most effective way of highlighting the severity of the threat in a world where money reigns free. Even so, whilst economic translation of these crises is effective for comprehension of the scale of the problem, to truly understand what all this means, money is immaterial. Over the last few decades, the growth of neo-liberal, extractive capitalism has fuelled an environmental crisis, the likes of which have never been seen before. For a single species to cause as much damage to the natural world as we have is not natural, and not sustainable. Biodiversity loss is at a critical rate. We are now in the Sixth Mass Extinction event; the first to be caused by the actions of one species out of the millions that share this planet. The main drivers of this decline are land-use change (deforestation and habitat loss), climate change, pollution, human-wildlife interactions, and invasive species, usually introduced into an area by humans. Land use change is the most significant of these factors. Throughout the world, forests and woodland are being cleared at a devastating rate as agriculture expands. The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation suggests production could reach 515m tonnes by 2050, almost double 2012 levels - with most of it fed to non-human animals as livestock. Amazonian deforestation has risen once again this year and will reach an ecosystem “tipping point” at 20-25% deforestation, fading into a dead savannah. By 2050, based on current trends, between 21-40% of
the Amazon’s original area could be deforested – the world’s greatest rainforest could be lost. Slash-andburn agriculture practices, encouraged by far-right Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, are fuelled by demand for beef and soy (predominantly exported for animal feed). EU figures have shown that in 2018, 20% of soy and 17% of beef imports from Brazil were linked to illegal deforestation, and even legal deforestation under Bolsonaro is a feeble term: illegally occupied indigenous land has previously been offered for legal use. Palm oil, found in many packaged, processed supermarket goods, has driven orangutans to the brink of extinction on the Indonesian islands of Borneo and Sumatra; 50% of the species are located in forest area owned by timber, oil, or mining companies. The future of our distant cousins, far more alike us than not, looks increasingly bleak, as oil palm monoculture seethes across the forests. In these cases, our demand for an overseas product perhaps offers an illusion of comfortable distance from the atrocities which result. We can express our sympathies, share our sorrow, but in less time than it takes for an area of forest the size of a football pitch to be cleared, our thoughts are elsewhere: out of sight, out of mind. But similar events are taking place at home too – or rather, they have taken place. The UK has one of the lowest rates in forest cover in the EU, and our biodiversity has been subject to a similar decline. This is partly due to our extirpation of predator species. Most notably in the Scottish Highlands, lynx and wolves were hunted to extinction, allowing deer populations to flourish. Young tree saplings are the meal of choice for deer, and without the natural population control the carnivores provided, tree cover was severely reduced. Now deer are considered a pest needing to be culled, and lynx re-introduction in Scotland is gaining popularity — a clear and pertinent lesson that nature knows what it is doing, and we do not. But there is another aspect to the resulting monotony of heather and rough grass —excessive overgrazing, as farmers turn out livestock onto green pastures. Where temperate rainforest should lie, Continued on page 3...
Opinion page 7
The fight for our future Feature page 12
Meeting Jason Culture page 16
Plus: Entertainment How Deaf U made me feel heard
Science & technology Record wildlife to keep it safe