A Call To Protect Much More Land and Sea From Human Encroachment

Posted by on September 16, 2018 in Eco-Friendly, Environment, Wildlife with 0 Comments

Amazon Rainforest, Peru, South America

Article Source: Phys.org

A noted figure in the science world has paired with a colleague to pen an editorial for the journal Science. Jonathan Baillie, executive VP and chief scientist at the National Geographic Society and Ya-Ping Zhang with the Chinese Academy of Sciences have published a paper strongly supporting the idea of establishing many more land and sea areas as protected sites. Failure to do so, they warn, could spell doom for many species, perhaps including our own.

The writers open their paper by asking a simple question: How much of planet Earth should be protected from human interference? They note that the human population has grown to enormous levels, and will likely continue to grow ever larger. That has led to a need for more land and sea resources to support them. They note that despite this need, humans must find a way to preserve natural ecosystems—and a lot more of them than current protocols are calling for.


They suggest that the governments of the world need to unite behind a common goal—setting aside 30 percent of the world’s land and oceans by 2030 and then raising that amount to 50 percent by 2050. The researchers acknowledge that achieving such a goal presents formidable challenges, but argue that doing anything less will likely result in mass extinctions and could jeopardize our own future, as well.

The authors note that currently, just 14.7 percent of the Earth’s total land area and 3.6 percent of ocean areas are protected, highlighting the urgency of this issue. They further note that in 2010, the world’s major players met to discuss strategies for maintaining biodiversity in the face of growing human demands.

They came up with 20 targets, one of which called for designating 17 percent of the land and 10 percent of the world’s oceans as protected. Baillie and Zhang suggest such targets would be “woefully inadequate.” They propose that more realistic targets need to be established—though they acknowledge that identifying such targets is extremely challenging, considering the limited understanding of how the world’s ecosystems actually work.

They believe it would be appropriate to err on the side of caution by designating more of the planet as protected than current targets. They also point out that logic suggests that the land and sea areas that are designated as protected should include those that need it most—those that are the most biologically diverse.

Explore further: Protected areas alone won’t save all threatened species


More information: Jonathan Baillie et al. Space for nature, Science (2018). DOI: 10.1126/science.aau1397

Tags: , , ,

Subscribe

If you enjoyed this article, subscribe now to receive more just like it.

Subscribe via RSS Feed Connect on YouTube

New Title

NOTE: Email is optional. Do NOT enter it if you do NOT want it displayed.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

FAIR USE NOTICE. Many of the articles on this site contain copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making this material available in an effort to advance the understanding of environmental issues, human rights, economic and political democracy, and issues of social justice. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law which contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. If you wish to use such copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use'...you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. And, if you are a copyright owner who wishes to have your content removed, let us know via the "Contact Us" link at the top of the site, and we will promptly remove it.

The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. Conscious Life News assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to these terms.

Paid advertising on Conscious Life News may not represent the views and opinions of this website and its contributors. No endorsement of products and services advertised is either expressed or implied.
Top

Send this to a friend