Download Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development

Chapter 2
Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development
Global Biodiversity Conservation
Biodiversity is the new international buzzword which has attracted as much
attention as global warming and ozone depletion. It has catapulated the center-stage
of world wide environmental politics in the last few years.
As discussed in previous chapter the word biodiveristy is the contraction of
biological diversity. Diversity is a concept which refers to the range of variation among
some set of entities; biological diversity thus refers to variety within the living. world.
The term biodiversity is in deed commonly used to describe the number, variety and
variability of living organisms.
It has become a widespread practice to define biodiversity in terms of genes,
species and ecosystems. Corresponding to three fundamental and hierarchically belated
levels of biological organization. But the most important definition of biodiversity is as,
"Biodiversity is the variety of the world's organisms, including their genetic diversity
and the assemblages they form. It is the blanket term for national biological wealth
that undergirds human life and well being. The breadth of the concept reflects the
inter-relatedness of genes, the components of species and ecosystems. Because
genes, the components of species and species are the components of ecosystems,
altering the making up of any level of this hierarchy can change the others. Species
are central to the concept of biodiversity. "1
(1) W. V.Reid and K.R.Miller, "Keeping Options Alive: The scientific Basis for Conserving Biodiversity", World Resource Institute, Washington, DC, 1989, P. 2.
38
I
L
Another definition is that," Biodiversity is the array of populations and species
of other organisms with which Homo Sapiens share Earth and the communities,
ecosystems, and landscape of which they are component parts. "2
On the basis of above definitions it can be understood that biodiversity
inhabiting the earth wild plants, animals, and micro-organisms, domesticated animals
and cultivated plants and even genetic materials like seeds and germplasm. It is that
vast class of things from which comes most of our food and medicine, much of our
clothing and housing, most of our cultural heritage and much of our intellectual and
spiritual learning. It is, without any doubt the very basis of our living.
Elements of Biodiversity
On the basis of above definitions we can divide biodiversity in three basic
types.
Genetic Diversity represents the heritable variation within and between
populations of organisms. Ultimately, this resides in variations in the sequence of the
four base pairs which, as components of nucleic acids, constitute the genetic code.
New variations arise in individuals by gene and chromosome mutations, and
in organisms with sexual reproduction can be spread through the population by
recombination. It has been estimated that in human and fruit flies alike, the number of
possible combinations of different forms of each gene sequence exceeds the number
of atoms in the universe. Other kind of genetic diversity can be identified at all levels of
organisation, including the amount of DNA per cell, and chromosome structure and
number.
(2) E. 0. Wilson," The Current State of Biodiversity", Biodiversity, ed. E. Wilson,
National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1988, pp. -3-18.
This pool of genetic variation present within an interbreeding population is
acted upon by selection. The significance of genetic variation is thus clear: it enables
both natural evolutionary change and artificial selective breeding to occur.
Each of the estimated 109 different genes distributed across the world's biota
does not make an identical contribution to overall genetic diversity. In particular those
genes which control fundamental biochemical processes are strongly conserved across
different taxa and generally show little variations, although such variation that does
exist may exert a strong effect on the viability of the organism, the converse is true of
other genes.
Biodiversity is very commonly used as a synonym of 'Species Diversity', in
particular of 'species richness', because the living world is most widely considered in
terms of species. Global biodiversity is typically presented in terms of global members
of species in different taxonomic groups. It has been calculated that 1. 7 million species
exist on earth to date but a rough estimation for the total number of species existing on
earth at present vary from five million to nearly 100 million. A conservative working
estimate suggests there might be around 12.5 million. In terms of species number
alone, life on earth appears to consist essentially of insects and micro organisms.
The species level in generally regarded as the most natural one at which to
consider whole organism diversity. Species are also the primary focus of evolutionary
mechanisms, and the origination and extinction of species are the principle agents in
governing biological diversity in most senses. On the other hand, species can not be
recognised and enumerated precisely by systematists and the concept of what a species
is differs considerably between groups of organisms. Further, a straight forward count
of the number of species only provide a partial indication of biological diversity.
Therefore, organisms which differ widely from each other in some respect by definition
contributes more to overall diversity than those which are very similar. The more different
40
a species is from any other species, the greater its contribution to overall measure of
global biological diversity.
The ecological importance of a species can have a direct effect on community
structure, and thus on overall biological diversity. For example, a species of tropical
rainforest tree which supports an endemic invertebrate fauna of a hundred species
evidently makes a greater contribution to the maintenance of global biological diversity
than a European alpine plant which may have no other species wholly dependent on
it.
Ecosystem Diversity is basically the quantitative assessment of diversity at the
ecosystem, habitat or community level remains problematic. There is no unique
definition and classification of ecosystems at global level. Therefore, it is difficult in
practice to assess ecosystem diversity other than on a local or regional basis and then
only largely in terms of vegetation. Ecosystem further differs from genes and species
in that they explicitly include a biotic components , being partly determined by soil
parent material and climate.
Ecosystem diversity is often evaluated through measure of the diversity of
the component species. This may involve assessment of the relative abundance of
different species as well as consideration of the types of species. Thus an ecosystem
which consists only of several species of plants would be less diverse than one with
the same number of species but which includes animal herbivores and predators. As
different weightings can be given to these different factors when estimating the diversity
of particular areas, there is no one authoritative index for measuring diversity. This
obviously has important implications for the ranking of different areas.
Types of Biodiversity
Preserving biodiversity is regarded as one of the major issues for enabling
sustainable use of natural resources. The major features of biodiversity are species
41
diversity, genetic diversity, functional diversity, spatial and temporal diversity.
Biodiversity is seen as an interdependent parts of a cluster of diversities in the human
society and in the ecological system. Thus, "All self-organizing living systems require
a minimum diversity of species to capture the solar energy and develop the cyclic
relations between the fundamental components of the system; the producers, the
consumers and the decomposers." 3
The concept of biodiversity is complex, sometimes confusing and beyond
full comprehension. We emphasize the importance of recognizing that there exist several
interdependent diversities at different hierarchical levels in the ecological systems. It
appears, however that species diversity depends less on the characteristics of a single
ecosystem than on interaction between ecosystem, e.g., transport, passive or active,
of living animals across land-water interface or the coastal offshore boundary. The
effect of such transport is an important information exchange enhancing the genetic
diversity.
Functional diversity is a property at the population level where as species
diversity exist. It denote the variety of responses to environmental change by organisms,
especially the diverse space of time scales to which organisms react to each other and
the environment is a property of the ecosystem. The functional diversity concept is
more strongly related to ecosystem stability and stresses physical forces for determining
population densities, such as the water effects of water movement and a proper timing
on larval recruitment in marine environment.
The functional diversity is enhanced by the topography of an area as well as
the occurrence of varied geological, climatic and meteorological features giving rise to
(3) M.Hammer, A.Jansson and B.Jansson, "Diversity changes and Sustainability:
Implications for Fisheries," AMB/0, Vol.22, No.2-3, May 1993, p.97.
a spatial and temporal diversity. It directs the distribution of living organisms. A high
spatial diversity provides niches for a larger number of species than monotonous
environment. There exist a high functional diversity in coastal ecosystems because of
complex interaction of short wave and long wave pulses. However, very strong physical
forces like ice-cover and winds may counteract the establishment of a diverse flora
and fauna as is the case of the northern part of the Baltic sea and Hurricane prone
Caribbean islands.
Value of Biodiversity
Biodiversity, the array of non-human organisms of our planet, should be
valued for four general reasons. First, we believe that, as the dominant species on
earth, Homo Sapiens has an ethical, stewardship responsibility towards humanity's
only known living companions in the universe. Second, as attested to by activities as
diverse as gardening, making of nature films, and eco-tourism, biodiversity has aesthetic
values. Third, humanity has derived many direct economic values from biodiversity,
including all of its food and many of its medicine and industrial products. The potential
of nature's genetic library for providing more of these benefits is enormous. Fourth,
and the most important from an anthropocentric perspective, plants, animals, and
micro-organisms help to supply human being with an array offree ecosystem services,
without which civilization could not persist. These includes such things as controlling
the gaseous mix ofthe atmosphere, generating and maintaining soils, controlling pests,
and running biochemical cycles. The present extinction episode caused by human
activity seriously jeopardizes the ethical, aesthetic, direct economic and life-support
values of biodiversity. It may be the single most important externality associated with
human economic activity. This is all set to maintaining ecological balance.
Both ecologists and economists agree that biodiversity has value to humanity.
Both groups also agree that the value of biodiversity to humanity has both use and
43
non-use components. Biodiversity can be important because it supplies us with food,
direct enjoyment, or ecosystem services; all use values. It also provides non-use values
especially so-called existence values.
The relationship between diversity and productivity has been the subject of
long standing debate in ecology. Recent studies have indicated that available energy
is strongly correlated with species diversity on a large scale, at least in terrestrial
ecosystems.
'.
The ethical values of biodiversity are based on the religious or quasi-religious
feelings of many people in many cultures. These values differ from society to society
and are not applied equally to all organisms. A religious Buddhist may strive to avoid
stepping on aunts when he walks, since he considers all life sacred. Many biologists
and environmentalists are of the opinion that "as the dominant species on the planet,
Homo Sapiens has an ethical responsibility to preserve biodiversity. This means
opposing intentional exterminations of other species and supporting conservation
efforts. "4 One can not assert this ethical responsibility on scientific grounds. It clearly
arises from essentially religious feelings; we believe that our only non-living companions
in the universe have a right to exist. We suspect that the basic problem of conserving
biodiversity is not likely to be solved until and unless a much larger proportion of the
human population comes to share this view.
"The aesthetic value of biodiversity in terms of the beauty of birds, a tropical
fish butterflies, and flowering plants are widely acknowledged. They support extensive
economic activities including bird watching and feedings, scuba diving, butterfly
collecting, photography and the making of nature films. We can say that all organisms
at least exhibit the beauty to design. Even if the insects didn't play critical roles in the
(4) P.R.Enrhich and A. H. Ehrlich," The Value of Biodiversity," AMB/0, Vo/.21, No.2,
May 1992, p. 220.
44
r.1
ecosystems that support humanity, to the degree that we lose their diversity, the world
becomes a less interesting place. Each species of bug is, as the great French
anthropologists Claude Levistrauss wrote, an irreplaceable treasure, equal to the works
of art which we religiously presence in musium." 5
Natural ecosystem, of course, also directly provides people with food and
innumerable materials of all sorts, from maple syrup and truffles to teak. Most notably,
a crucial portion of the protein in our diets comes straight from nature in the form of
fishes and animal harvested from the seas. The timber and other wood products that
we harvest from forests are also provided free by natural ecosystems. Rubber, many
kinds of oils and organic chemicals, species and herbs, wild berries and game are
provided by natural ecosystems.
Natural ecosystem maintain a vast genetic library from which Homo Sapiens
has already withdrawn the very basis of civilization and which also promises future
benefits. "That library of millions of different species and billions of genetically distinct
populations is what biologists are referring to when they speak of biotic diversity, or
biodiversity. All crops and all domestic animals, of course, originated from that library."6
Wild plants and animals could be source of new foods to augement the human
food supply. It has shifted to the big three (wheat, rice and maize) and other widely
grown and improved crops at the expense of many traditional varieties and species.
The narrowing down of the genetic base of major crops is a serious concern that has
been addressed. But ·the neglect of potential food plants that have never been
domesticated and of many traditional foods in tropical regions is also a serious matter;
(5) Discussion of the Special Commision on Internal Pollution, London, October, 1975.
(6) P.R. Enrlich and A.H.Enrlich, "The Value of Biodiversity," AMB/0, Vo/.21, No.3,
May 1992, p. 220.
45
as the tropical forests, the prime potential sources of new ·foods, drugs, and other
useful materials are vanishing at an accelerating pace. Furthermore the tropical regions
where such new foods might be found are the regions where people are hungriest and
very much in need of new food resources. As two scholars put it.
"Species of habitat offer the substantial products of biological evolution.
Species provides direct use values as materials for food, clothing and shelter and as
feed stocks for medicine, genetic research and crossbreeding to improve crop
characteristics. Biodiversity also produces amenity and existence values. "7
Overtime, all these values from biodiversity are likely to be strong 'growth
industries.' With the help of modem computer and other information technologies,
genetic and related sciences offer tremendous, almost unimaginable potential for
creating values from biodiversity.
Humanity, of course, is dependent for its very existence on other organisms.
These organisms in all their extraordinary variety are part and parcel of a global life
support system that benefits them and humanity as well. Perhaps the most dependence
of humanity on other organisms is through the process of photosynthesis. Human
being must obtain their energy from photosynthesis, either by eating them or eating
other animals.
"Members of biological communities, the collection of organisms living in an
area interact continuously with their non-living surroundings, and the interacting
complexes are what biologists call ecosystems. Every kind of organisms exchange
gases with its physical environment."8
(7) J.A. Sweeney and Paulette I. Olson," The Economics of Biodiversity Lives and Life
Styles", Journal of Economic Issues. Vol. 26, No.1, March 1992, p.2.
(B) P.R. Enrlich and A.H.Enrlich, "The Value of Biodiversity", AMB/0, Vol. 21, No. 3,
May 1992, p.221.
46
I
Because of the crucial importance of interactions between living and nonliving portions of the biosphere, they can be viewed as two components. That is why
ecologists consider the entire biosphere to be an ecosystem.
There are two types of ecosystems crucial to the functioning of human society
today. The first kind is agricultural ecosystems, whose importance to society is obvious.
Basically they are simplified versions of natural ecosystems, artificially maintained by
humanity to increase the production of commodities that people need and desire. "The
importance of natural ecosystems is less widely appreciated, but society depends
upon them every bit as much as it depends on agricultural ecosystems. "9
This is true because agricultural ecosystems are embedded in natural ones
and depends on the natural components for their sustained productivity.
Other values from biodiversity include ecosystems life support services. These
values ranges from watershed maintenance to rainfall to clean air to temperature
moderation to healthy soils. Generally a more diverse ecosystem is more stable and in
ecosystem services more productive. Overtime the preservation of biodiversity will
provide the genetic, biological and ecosystem feedstock for solution to all sorts of an
yet unopposed human problems. In short there are plenty of authropocenteic values
to be realized from protecting biodiversity.
Therefore, on the basis of above discussion we can say that biodiversity is a
resource for which there is absolutely no substitute. It's loss is irreversible on any time
scale of interest to society. The loss can be viewed as one of the most single serious
externality associated with human economic activity.
(9) Ibid, p. 222.
47
Biodiversity Depletion and Species Extinction
The loss of biological diversity may take many forms but at its most
fundamental and irreversible it involves extinction of species.
In the past decade a great deal of attention has been focused on the problems
of protecting endangered species. Leading biologists, economist and others do
reasonably conclude that conserving earth species diversity is the crucial task before
us. But the loss of species is only one aspect of the extinction crisis, and in many parts
of the world may not be the most important facet of the decay of biological diversity.
"A species can not go extinct unless all of its population are extinct and the
extinction of component populations influences the probability of the entire species
disappearing. Similarly the loss of population and species can not be separated from
the degradation of the higher order units. "10
"The vulnerability of a species to extinction may be difficult to assess from
the number and sizes of its populations. For example, a species may suffer the loss of
a great many of its components populations without itself becoming threatened. In
other case, however, reduction in number and sizes of population may doom a species
to extinction long before it becomes scarce in nature, as was true for the passenger
pigeon."11
Rate of Population Loss
In many parts of the world the extinction of population, rather than of
species may be the most important fact of the decay of biological diversity. Therefore,
(1 0) P.R. Ehrlich and G. C. Daily, «Population Extinction and Saving Biodiversity,"
AMBIO, Vol. 22, No. 2-3, May 1993, p. 64.
(11) D.E. Blockrtein and H.B. Tordoff, "Gone For Ever: A Contemporary Look at the
Extinction of the Passenger Pigeon," American Birds, 1985, Vol. 39, p. 848.
48
propose that we face the prospect of losing 20 per cent of all species within 30 years
and 50 per cent or more by the end of next century. All these estimates are explicitly
conservative.
Species are being eliminated today almost entirely through the direct effects
of human activities. But in future, many species could be made extinct through impacts
of more indirect sort. Already human engage in so much exploitation, diversion, waste
and other significant misuse of plant growth that they are effectively appropriating 40
per cent of all such growth on land each year leaving 60 per cent for the millions of
other species. What will happen when human number double as is projected within
another few decades? Even if this means that human impact an plant growth merely
doubles, it is likely to be more as people demand more products from plants, the
reminder of earth's species could hardly survive with only 20 per cent of plant growth
per year.
Causes of Biodiversity Loss
Species may be exterminated by man through a series of effects and
agencies. These may be divided into two broad categories. These are proximate (direct)
and underlying (indirect) causes. The proximate or direct causes lying partly within the
domain of ecology and the other biological sciences and partly within economics. The
underlying causes lying largely within the domain of economics and the other social
sciences. The first set of causes include both the direct extermination of species (e.g.hunting, collection and persecution). and the ecosystemic changes that lead to the
collapse of species population.
The second concerns the factors that lie behind economic activity which
lead to species depletion directly or through the destruction of habitat and modification.
Overhunting is perhaps the most obvious direct cause of extinction of animals,
50
as it has affected several large and well known species. In terms of overall loss of
biodiversity, however, it is undoubtedly far less important than the indirect causes of
habitat modification and loss. At present ecologists estimate that less than one tenth
of 1 per cent of naturally occurring species are directly exploited by humans. It is
therefore argued that the major threat to the loss of species is not caused by direct
human exploitation of species, but by the habitat alteration and destruction that result
from the expansion of human population and human activities. Habitat change by
human is caused directly through landuse changes, urbanization, infrastructure
development and industrialization, and indirectly through environmental effects caused
by the use and extraction of resources from the environment, and the discharge of
various wastes to air, soil and water. But the most frequently cited proximate cause of
the destruction of habitat which lies behind biodiversity loss is the growth of human
population. "The sustainability of the ecological system of which human are parts and
the welfare of them depends on it does not imply a unique equilibrium level of human
population or a unique rate of human population growth. However, the resilience of an
ecosystem does depend on the level of stress is a function of human population density
and behaviour. Increasing human population may imply increasing levels of stress
and this may in turn imply loss of resilience. Since, for a given technology, human
population growth implies a increasing level of stress on the ecosystems exploited
under that technology, there is necessarily some point at which the associated loss of
ecosystem resilience will become critical. Human population growth will at some point
cause the collapse of those ecosystem." 14
Therefore, the main points here are, first, that "the relationship between
population growth in any given environment and the degradation of that environment
is not necessarily monotonic. It is mediated by the institutional and economic
(14) Charles Perrings, Carl Folk and Kari-Goran Maler, "The Ecology and Economics
of Biodiversity Loss: The Research Agenda," AMB/0. Vol. 21, No. 3, May 1992,
p. 205.
51
environments within which resources users operate, and· there is no systematic
relationship between population growth and either institutional or economic condition."15
On the basis of above mentioned sentences by Charles Perrings we can
conclude here that population growth is not always and everywhere environmental
damaging. The second point is that the impact of population growth on resource
degradation is highly sensitive to the technology used. The third point is that the impact
of resource degradation on population growth is more complex than a simple Malthusian
argument would suggest. Therefore, if we are interested in the prevention of future
biodiversity loss it would seem to be most important to understand and address the
incentives that lie behind human population trend. It is certainly not helpful to assume
that the above trends are simply the product of social ignorance, and institutional
irresponsibility.
What ultimately driving biodiversity loss are the ind~pendent decisions of the
billions individual users of environmental resources world wide. The problem is that
while those decisions privately rational, given the information available to the decisionmaker, it is most doubtful whether they represent the best outcome of society. That is,
the private and social values of species conservation are different. As Charles Perrings
differentiates between private and social costs based on different factors. He says
"Divergence between the private and social costs of ecological services and the
biodiversity on which those sciences depend, may be due to a number of factors:
ignorance, uncertainty, the incompleteness of markets, the distribution of income and
assets, the strategic market behaviour of economic agents and a range of policy
interventions. "16
(15) See Charles Perrings, p. 206.
(16)See Charles Perrings, p. 207.
52
Three of the above mentioned factors are especially important. The first is
the role of government. There is by now a considerable literature on the impact of
government policy in distorting the private cost of environment. As E.B. Barbier,
J.C.Burgess and A. Markandya blame government policies for increasing deforestation.
They argue that "Detumping subsidies in agriculture and stumpage fees or royalties in
forestry are argued to have encouraged deforestation at excessive rates both in terms
of rates of felling in timber concessions and the clearance of ever more marginal land
for agriculturalland."17
Subsidies designed to promote cash cropping as a means of increasing export
revenue are argued to have resulted in leaching, soil acidification and loss of soil
nutrients, and to the reduction in the resilience of key ecosystems. There is, infact, still
a great deal to be done to establish where the biases in the set of prices confronting
resource users lie.
The second factor in the divergence of private and social costs is poverty.
The problem with respect to information as Das Gupta has remarked, is that it is not
cost less. The poor, are not able to command as much information as the rich. The
major issues here concern that causes and environmental effects of poverty.
The third factor is the divergence of private and social cost concerns the
effect of the absence of markets and existence of externalities. There are two types of ·
externalities, i.e., reciprocal and unidirectional. Reciprocal externalities are those in
which all parties having rights to access to a resource are able to impose costs on
each other, where unidirectional externalities are the case when, for example,
deforestation by the users of an upper watershed inflicts damage on the users of the
(17) E.B. Barbier, J.C. Bungess and A. Markandya, "The Economics of Tropical
Deforestation," AMB/0, Vol. 20, No. 2-3, p. 55.
53
lower watershed. The point is that the external costs and benefits of resource use in
the two cases will be asymmetrical, and the solution to each type of externality as
rather different. What is important here is that while biodiversity in the large is very
much a public good, i.e., part of the global commons, most of the local biodiversity loss
resulting from the destruction of habitat represent unidirectional externality. The last
cluster of issues concerns the question of what can be done about biodiversity loss.
The ecological side of the above discussion has suggested that the proximate causes
are .to be found in the direct or indirect destruction of the resilience of these systems
which constitute the habitat of species. The economic side has suggested that if
biodiversity loss is indeed contrary to the interests of society, the underlying cause is
to be found in the divergence between the private and social costs of resource use.
Charles Perrings suggests two broad categories of issues as "The first concerns the
scope for species preservation despite existing loss of habitat. The second concerns
the scope for modifying the structure of incentives governing the decisions of individual
resource users. "18
Losses due to Population Extinction
Why should one care if population become extinct? First, one might consider
the extent and permanence of the destruction of natural habitat for spreading urban
and agricultural areas as morally objectionable. Second, the aesthetic value of a species
diminishes as its population disappears. Third, the direct economic value of species
generally reduced as its populations are exterminated. Fourth, the extinction of
population influences the probability of persistence of the entire. species. Because of
adaptation to different environmental conditions and random chance population differs
in their genetic structure. The genetic variability represented by geographically disparate
population helps assure the ability of the entire species to respond evolutionary
~ See Charles Perrings, p. 207.
54
environmental changes. If, for example, there is rapid climatic change, a widespread
species with vast population is more likely to include individuals that are genetically
suited to new conditions than species with just a single local population. Thus, interpopulation genetic variation ordinarily enhances the chance of a species persisting.
Furthermore, this genetic variation is of direct value to humanity. AsP. Ehrlich and A.
Ehrlich remark that "Inter-population genetic visibility increases the probability that
new crops and domestic animals can be extracted from nature's genetic library,
maintaining resistance to draught, pests, and disease in present strains and breeds."19
Fifth, (the most important reason for caring about the extinction of population),
there are ecosystem services provided by population on global, regional and local
levels, and these services constitute the most important source of benefits received by
humanity on a global level. For example, destruction of vast majority of tree population,
without wiping out any tree species, might add enough additional carbon dioxide to the
atmosphere to make the difference between relatively slow climatic change resulting
from global warming and a change that is very rapid and catastrophic for agriculture.
On a regional scale, the species of microorganisms that once made the Rhine- the
selfpurifying waterways are probably all extent. The continued existence of the tree
species whose population once blanketed the Himalayas, helping to control run-off of
precipitation, was irrelevent to the recent devastating flooding of Bangladesh.
Deforestation and Species Extinction
The loss of species as a result of deforestation and degradation of tropical
forests levels has been widely accepted. The state of tropical forests has led of timber
production and international timber trade in promoting forest depletion and degradation
in the tropics. Although the direct and indirect environmental impacts of commercial
logging may be significant, particularly for a few species regions and countries.
(19)P.R. Enrlich and A.H.Enrlich, "The Value of Biodiversity", AMBIO, Vol. 21, No. 3,
May 1992, p. 222.
55
"The total area of natural tropical forests was estimated to be 1715 million
hectare in 1990. approximately 36 per cent of the total land area in the tropics. Of this,
tropical rainforests (656 million hectare) and moist deciduous forests (66 million hectare)
constitute the largest portion (30% and 37% respectively). On a regional level, Africa
accounts for 47 per cent of the total land area within the tropics, but contain only 35
per cent of the total tropical forest. Asia has the smallest region within the tropics
(15%) but contain the equal proportion of tropical forests (15% of the total tropical
forest area). Latin America and Caribbean make up the remaining 35% of the tropical
zone area, and contain the largest extent of tropical forest resources (50% of the total
tropical forest area.)". 20
The extent of tropical deforestation reached 16.9 million hectare per annum
at an annual deforestation rate of 0.9 per cent, throughout the 1980's? The highest
rate of deforestation at 1.2 per cent of the tropical countries, Brazil and Indonesia incur
the, highest extent of annual forest loss. The major causes behind tropical deforestation
are conversion of forests to other uses such as agriculture and domestic consumption
in timber producer countries. This proportion of tropical timber production does not
enter the international trade.
Nevertheless, there is genuine cause for concern over excessive exploitation
in many regions, including the indirect impacts of unsustainable harvesting practices
and the incentives to convert forest areas into other uses, i.e. agriculture and livestock
renching. Therefore, an important factor in reducing timber related tropical deforestation
is ensuring proper economic incentives for efficient and sustainable management of
tropical production forests. Appropriate forest management policies and regulation
within producer countries ought to provide these incentives.
(20) J. C. Burgess, "Timber Production, Timber Trade and Tropical Deforestation,"
AMB/0, Vol. 22. No. 2-3, May 1993, p. 136.
56
Protecting/Conserving Biological Diversity
Biological diversity is a global resource and conserving diversity brings benefrts
to all nations. The current threats to biodiversity are greatest in developing countries
(particularly developing small island states) with insufficient financial means for
supporting conservation efforts. Conservation brings considerable and sustainable
benefits to local communities, but consuming biological resources requires investments,
in staff, in infrastructure, in education and in many more areas. These investments are
often vary sound, showing high benefit-cost ratio; the more complete the economic
analysis, the higher such ratios are likely to be.
Biodiversity is important for the fact that it is this variety and variations occurring
in nature which has sustained the harmonious existence of life on earth. The
components of biodiversity are so interdependent that any major imbalance and
threatens the normal ecological cycle.
Man, being one of the chief components of biodiversity is dependent on the
resources around and also responsible for the present ecological imbalance of nature.
This is the result of over exploitation of resources and unsystematic approach to the
utilization of natural resources.
Biodiversity utilisation and present management is the responsibility of, the
most highly evolved life form on earth, man. Over the years man has advanced
technologically but failed to understand and appreciate the value of biodiversity. Instead,
our species has made sustained exploitation of natural resources almost has reached
a stage of no return. It is at this juncture that some of the warnings given by sensible
elements ofthe so-called custodians ofthe bio-resources have attracted some attention.
The eye of the world body is now wide opened to this problem and it is trying
to find ways and means of conserving the available resources and also making them
available for the use of all concerned.
concern of human kind and in due recognition that a fundamental requirement for
such action was that conservation of ecosystems and natural habitat. As A. H. wasting
remarks the purpose of conserving biodiversity, "The conservation of biodiversity
involves the protection of diverse natural habitat, both terrestrial and oceanic, throughout
the globe- a globe that is in large part partitioned among some 190 sovereign states.
Among the several crucial consideration that arise in conserving biodiversity are the
optimal numbers, sizes and locations of the natural habitats that need protection." 21
Finally, all these above mentioned efforts needs a change in the attitude of
bureaucrats in order to solve the problem, develop harmonious associations of the
forest department and forest communities toward being partners in conserving
biodiversity adopting new management approaches to the whole problem.
Understanding the multi product benefits of Biodiversity, through incorporating in
technical advancement in research and management aspect of forests.
Global Sustainable Development
A dominating problem in today's world is how to provide a decent standard
of living to the earth's human population without destroying the life systems on which
the very existence of humanity,depends. The solution to this problem has been termed
sustainable development." Sustainable development may be defined as the use of
natural resources without destroying the possibility for future generations of using the
resources in the same way, if they wanted. This may seem a utopian goal, embracing
two factors that can not be reconciled: economic development and conservation of
biological resources. However utopian; there is no alternative to facing this big challenge.
The term sustainable development came into prominance in 1980 when the
international union for the conservation of nature and Natural Resources (IUCN)
(21) A. H. Westing, "Biodiversity and the Challenge of National Border," Environmental Conservation, Vo/.20, No.1, Spring 1993, p. 5.
59
The Semantics of Sustainable Development
Figure-1
Phrase
Concepts
I
Sustainable Development
!
I
I
Connotatio nl
Sustainability
Development
!
!
Literal
Social
Objectives
Process
Ecological
I
Meaning
Sustaining
Econogical Basis
of Human Life
I
Sustaining
Anything
Growth
and/orchange
---I
Conditions
L
Interpretation
!
Ecological
Condition
---i-----,
Sustaining
Social Basis of
I
~----,---,
Human Life
r
I
I
I
I
Basic Needs,
Etc.
Social
Condition
I
I
I
I
I
I
~------
l
S.D.= Sustaining Growth
(Contradictory and Trivail)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
S.D.= Achieving Traditional
Objectives + Ecological
(&Social) Sustainablllty
(Mainstream and Meaningful)
Source: Sharach Chandra and M. Lele., World Development, Vol. 19. No. 6, p. 608.
60
presented the world conservation strategy (WCS) with "the ·overall aim of achieving
sustainable development through the conservation of living resources;" 22 Critics
acknowledged that by identifying sustainable Development as the basic goal of society,
the world conservation strategy (WCS) was able to make a profound contribution toward
reconciling the interests of development community with those of environmental
movement.
The world commission on environment and Development (WCEO) has defined
sustainable development as "Sustainable development is development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generation to meet
their own needs. "23
The constraint of "not compromising the ability of future generations to meet
..
~
their needs" is considered by the commission to be equivalent to the requirement of
some level of ecological and social sustainability. The commission (WCED) is much
more elaborate about the operational objectives of sustainable development. According
to the WCED" the critical objectives which follow from the concept of sustainable
development are:
(a) reviving growth
(b) changing the quality of growth
(c) meeting essential needs for jobs, food, energy water and sanitation
(d) ensuring a sustainable level of population
(e) conserving and enhancing the resource base
(22) Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, "World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development," 1980.
(23) World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, p. 43.
61
(f) reorienting technology and managing risk
(g) merging environment and economics in decision making
(h) reorienting international economic relations "24
Most organizations and agencies actively promoting the concept of
sustainable development subscribe to some or all of these objectives with, however,
the notable addition of a ninth operational goal, viz.,
(i) making development more participatory.
This formulation can therefore be said to represent the mainstream of
sustainable development thinking. This mainstream includes international environmental
agencies such as UNEP, IUCN and the world wild fund (WWF) development agencies
including the World Bank, the US Agency· for International Development, World
Resources Institute and many other recognized agencies.
Despite of aforesaid characteristics of sustainable development there are
still· some interpretational problems. Most people use the phrase • Sustainable
development' interchangeably with ecological sustainable or ecological sustainable or
environmentally sound development.
In contrast, sustainable development is some times interpreted as 'sustained
growth', 'sustained change' or 'simply successful development'.
Taken literally, sustainable development would simply mean 'development
that can be continued either indefinitely or for the implicit time period of concern.
Therefore, we can equal sustainable development with sustainability + development.
"In the mainstream interpretation of sustainable development, ecological sustainability
(24) Ibid, p. 44.
62
is a desired attribute of any pattern of human activities that is·the goal of development
process. In other words, sustainable development is understood as a form of societal
change that in addition to traditional developmental objectives, has the objective of
ecological sustainability." 25
Given an ever changing world the specific forms of and priorities among
objectives, and the requirements for achieving sustainability would evolve continuously.
But sustainability as it is understood at each stage would remain fundamental concern.
Ecological sustainability is, of course, not independent of the other (traditional) objectives
of development. In some cases, however, ecological sustainability and traditional
development objectives could be mutually reinforcing.
Most people now admit that many human activities are currently reducing
the long-term ability of the natural environment to provide goods and services as well
as adversely affecting current human health and well being. Many would also accept
that grinding poverty is devastating the lives of millions of individuals all over the world.
But neither of these insights has been able to generate a consensus between those
concerned about environmental issues and those focusing upon economic and
developmental ones.
The insights that have pushed us toward this consensus pertain to the feed
back between social and environmental phenomena. There is now a growing consensus
that "many environmental problems in developing countries originate from the lack of
development, that is from the struggle to overcome extreme condition of poverty. The
environmental degradation impoverishes that dependent directly on the natural
environment for survival and conversely, that development must be environmentally
sound if it is to be permanent. Thus, environmental quality and economic development
(25) Sharach Chandra and M. Lele, "Sustainable Development: A Critical Review,"
World Development._ Vol. 19, No. 6, 1991, p. 611.
63
are interdependent and in the long term, mutually reinforcing. The question is, however,
no longer whether it contradict each other but how to achieve this sustainable
development". 26
To establish the nature ofthe linkages between environment and development
was the most outstanding issue of the UN conference on environment and development.
UN CEO also determined the foundation for a global partnership between the developing
and industrially developed countries. That is based on a recognition of mutual needs
and common interests. .
When considering environmentally sound sustainable development it appears
that there are three sets of linkages between environment and development. "One of
the most important linkages is that between poverty, demographic pressures and
development. Another set of linkages is that between growth patterns, consumption
standards and environmental consequences. The third set of linkages relates to the
international financial dimension, such as debt and debt adjustment deterioration in
terms of trade and reverse financial flows. However, the linkage between poverty,
demographic pressures and development is at the forefront of international attention. "27
It is now clearly visible from the above discussion that without sustainable
development we can not protect environment from being degraded. There is an intimate
relationship between the environmental preservation and sustainable development. In
the following discussion we will try to establish relationship between biodiversity
conservation and sustainable development.
(26) P. Berte/mus, "Environment and Development", London, 1986.
(27) Dunja Pastizzi-Ferencic, •Natural Resources and Environmentally Sound Sustainable Development," Natural Resource Forum, 1992. p. 4.
64
Relationship between Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development
With the increasing scale of human activity the adverse impacts on the
environment (Biodiversity) have prompted a search for development paths that are
more sustainable. The relationship of biodiversity and sustainable development was
acknowledged in 1987 by the world commission on environment and development
(WCED). The commission quoted this relationship as ''Today, the conservation of wild
living resources is on the agenda of governments, nearly 4 per cent of the earth's land
area is managed explicitly to conserve species and ecosystem, and all but a small
handful of countries have national parks. The challenge facing nations today is no
longer deciding whether conservation is a good idea, but rather how it can be
implemented in the national interest and within the means available to each country. "28
While biological resources are essential to human welfare, the biological
diversity of the planet is under greater threat than ever before. It faces problem from
the local level (poaching, encroachment of protected area) and the global level
(deforestation, global climate change). Despite the best efforts of biologists, ecologists,
wildlife managers and park planners, biological diversity is now under siege throughout
the world. More species than ever before are threatened with extinction, with hundredsperhaps thousands- disappearing each year. Many of them before they are described.
And the knowledge ofthe possible uses of plants and animals, which is held largely by
indigenous people living in remote undeveloped areas, is being lost as forest habitats
are destroyed relentlessly.
The conservation of biological wealth is not simply a traditional protection
agenda but a scientific, economic, social, political and development issue. "New modes
of financing, cooperation and the integration of conservation into the developmental
process are required. It is not simply a problem of the tropical poor countries. While
(28) World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, p. 45.
65
more than half of earth's biological wealth lies in the tropics, and at least 40 per cent of
the total in the 20 countries containing significant amounts of the remaining tropical·
moist forests, all nations, carry responsibilities to conserve the biodiversity within their
own borders. Any scheme to establish priorities for the conservation needs of biodiversity
must recognize that, from a national perspective, the maintenance of local biological
resources is essential to support sustainable development even if the nation's biological
diversity is not particularly high from a global perspective." 29
Conservation of biological diversity and it's sustainable utilization evokes a
multitude of responses depending on the perception of different groups of people.
Most of the sovereign governments are concerned about biodiversity loss for both
reasons to varying degrees. As they recognise the intrinsic value of biodiversity, but
are also concerned about the potential loss of commercial value from over exploitation.
The developed countries are more concerned about the loss of commercial value
though they want to show concern for conservation and can afford to place greater
emphasis on conservation for its own sake. In developing countries that are under
extreme economic and political trauma the concern for conservation among the rural
population is very low for they are fighting for survival, while in others, where the basic
needs of human existence are met. The population is more concerned about maining
their ecologically sound traditional life style.
Whatever are the differences between developed and developing countries
for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development, there is a group of pilot
schemes, called 'Integrated Conservation Development Projects (ICOPs), has been
started for biodiversity conservation with sustainable development. "These projects
include biosphere reserves, multiple-use areas and a variety of rural development
initiatives on the boundaries of national parks as well as regional land use schemes
(29) The Programme of the Commonwealth Science Council, "Biological Diversity and
Genetic Resources," 1995, p. 6.
66
with protected area components. The~e projects aim to achieve their conservation
goals by promoting development and providing local people with alternative income
sources which sustain rather than threaten the flora and fauna in natural habitats."30
The establishment of field-level linkages between conservation and
development has been promoted by the 1980 world conservation strategj', the 1982
World Parks congress in Bali and the 1987 Brundtland Report. Therefore, the ICDP
approach has received increasing attention from multilateral and bilateral development
institutions as well as conservation organisation and government agencies.
Whatever the approach, the achievement of an ecologically sustainable form
of development can be interpreted as a process that seeks to make higher standard of
living for human being by enhancing their capabilities to live well. Because that
recognises this can not be achieved at the expanse of environmental integrity. Strategies
for achieving a ecologically sustainable mode of development would undoubtedly vary
according to country or region. Because each would face somewhat different conditions
and perhaps even different conceptions of developmental goals.
Ultimately, the desirability of ecologically sustainable development hings upon
the desirability of development itself. If the process of development is important to us
only in so far as we achieve a certain level of prosperity at any given moment in time,
than sustaining the conditions of development can be of little value on the other hand,
if seeking to live well is fundamentally important to us not only throughout our lives but
throughout the lives of future generations. Than engaging in a mode of less than
ecologically sustainable development would be not only contradictory but immoral.
Therefore, if we wish to achieve some sort of consensus on environmental
or developmental policy that is ecologically sustainable. For this we should prepared
(30) Mohan Monasinghe, "Biodiversity Protection Policy: Environmental Valuation and
Distribution Issues," AMBIO. Vol. 21, No. 3, May 1992, p. 234.
67
to tackle, at least in general, such questions as; why is sustainability desirable? What
form of sustainability is best? With what means should we seek to achieve sustainability?
These questions are necessary because sustainability is more an issue is managing
our environment and biological diversity; it is also an issue in managing ourselves.
On the basis of above discussion we can say that conservation of biodiversity
is important for sustainable development at an levels ranging from the global to the
local. Here is a suggestion that improving the incomes and welfare of local communities
and simultaneously preserving physical and biological systems in protected areas offer
opportunities for developing countries to pursue both environmental and developmental
goal in a complementary manner. The use of biotechnology can be helpful in achieving
these goals. Because biotechnology presents an important potential for a productive
link between conservation and sustainable utilisation of genetic diversity. Biotechnology
can lead to new and improved methods of preservation of plant and animal genetic
resources. It offers new possibilities for increasing the production of food, medicine,
energy, speciality chemicals and raw materials, and for improving environmental
management. Because maintenance of a wide genetic base is essential to the future
of biotechnology and the sustainable use of biological resources.
68