Nature Positive or Net Negative?

As these chaotic CBD meetings draw to a close, have the results actually been positive for nature, or should we conclude that they are net negative? 

As noted by many, it often felt as if delegates were decorating an entire plantation full of Christmas trees, to be followed by a cold storm of the co-chairs effectively destroying all the ornaments, after which the delegates joyfully started to hang new ornaments again. 

That there seemed to be a regional bias in terms of what ornaments were destroyed was not helpful either. One clear example was that tiny but very problematic word “net” that initially only appeared in one of the milestones. The milestones did not survive the first storm, but the “net” returned and is now included in draft Mission of the Global Biodiversity Framework. 

So why is that a problem? Because the term “net gain” (or the term “nature positive, for that matter) suggests that we could simply compensate biodiversity loss with “biodiversity gains”. So if we do not succeed in preventing the extinction of rhinos for example, we can simply create two new species (through the “innovations” many Parties have promoted) and we have a “net gain” in biodiversity. We can also continue to destroy the Congo Basin rainforest and simply plant 4.5 million hectares of monoculture tree plantations, as part of the African Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative.

But sadly, for the women and men who depend on forests and other ecosystems for their livelihoods, such compensation projects do not work. A tree plantation or national park in a totally different area will not compensate them for the destruction of their livelihoods. So fundamentally, such “net gain” approaches to biodiversity are very negative, not only for nature itself, but also for the people who depend on it. 

For more details see also https://globalforestcoalition.org/biodiversity-offsets/

By Simone Lovera, PhD, executive director, Global Forest Coalition

__________________________________________________________________________

The opinions,commentaries, and articles printed in ECO are the sole opinion of the individual authors or organizations, unless otherwise expressed.