It is crucial to have 30×30 to successfully control the worldwide decrease in biodiversity

Ecologists and advocates are turning their attention to an ambitious plan in light of the escalating threat to biodiversity. The proposed plan aims at shielding at least 30% of the planet’s terrestrial and marine regions by 2030. This proposal was inspired by the notable entomologist E.O. Wilson’s 2016 publication, Half Earth, which implied dedicating half of our planet to nature.

Though Wilson did not witness the near universal international accord made at the Cop15 Montreal convention in December 2022, it’s certain he would have been pleased. While the 30×30 agreement falls short of his initial vision of safeguarding half the earth, it nevertheless marks a profound step toward achieving this aspiration.

The concept of “protected area” for nature evolved through colonial settlement. One iconic example is Yellowstone, which became the first designated national park in America in 1873, but came at the expense of the expulsion of its indigenous inhabitants. This led to implications of “fortress conservation”, which drew wide criticism for displacing local communities, overlooking their ecological wisdom and criminalising traditional practices.

This issue is far from antiquated. When the Irish government undertook the establishment of protected areas in accordance with the EU’s Habitats Directive in the 90s, it essentially replicated the same framework. This resulted in farmers feeling a deep-seated apprehension towards “designations”, which have left them with nothing but imposed limitations and resulted in meagre income and social inequality.

At the Cop15 meeting in Montreal, historical injustices were broached. The representative from Namibia emphasised that reconciling with the “systemic trauma” induced by the “violence of colonisation” is of utmost importance for striving towards coexistence with nature. This perspective is predominantly endorsed in conservation sectors. A recent study led by Georgina Gurney from James Cook University in Townsville, Australia, posited that although the 30×30 objective necessitates significant intensification of area-focused conservation, it also demands a far-reaching overhaul of its execution to be effective.

The researchers have asserted that obtaining the proposed goal would necessitate that the current protected land area be expanded twofold, and the marine protected area be tripled. They further highlighted that traditional ‘fortress conservation’, which often leads to displacement of local communities, yields extreme social detriments. As such, they proposed a shift from viewing local communities as solely potential threats to the environment, towards seeing them as potential custodians of nature.

Section-conservation, when executed appropriately, has shown great efficacy in preserving both biodiversity and local livelihoods. The global authority in this respect, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), even designates safeguarded areas as the bedrock of biodiversity conservation, and the foundation of endeavours to preserve nature and the services it renders to humans.

Among the advocates for the 30×30 initiative was Brian O’Donnell, director of the Colorado-based NGO, Campaign for Nature. He identified the scheme as a pivotal aspect of combating the widespread global degradation of biodiversity.

A significant portion of his work engages indigenous populations and local communities, recognising them as essential guardians of key zones for global biodiversity. He referenced clauses in the agreement mandating “free, prior and informed consent”, as well as the necessity for acknowledgment of territorial rights.

In O’Donnell’s view, such recognition is of utmost importance. He argued that the 30×30 initiative’s success hinges on the active involvement, endorsement, and leadership of local communities, warning that an imposed plan may meet resistance and fail to achieve lasting results.

O’Donnell also stressed the importance of carefully selecting areas for protection. While specific locations were not identified in Montreal, the reality is that biodiversity is not evenly distributed. Therefore, protecting which 30% of land and water bodies becomes just as vital as the overall protection target.

According to him, prioritising the preservation of significant areas of natural ecosystems, especially in tropical regions, outweighs the need to protect 30% of land in countries predominantly used for farming. However, he added that these countries still bear responsibility, urging them to contribute financial resources and embark on restoration efforts where feasible.

The argument has been made for Ireland, being an affluent nation, to play a role in assisting countries with a higher degree of biodiversity who lack the requisite resources for conservation. The text demonstrates how wealthier nations like Ireland often externalise biodiversity loss through their consumption habits, which can impact poorer countries. Ireland indicated its commitment to this cause by joining the High Ambition Coalition for Nature and People at the Cop15, spearheaded by Minister of State Malcolm Noonan. Alongside other nations including France, the UK, the USA, and China, Ireland agreed to protect 30% of its territory.

Domestically, Mr Noonan has recently unveiled Ireland’s fourth National Biodiversity Action Plan (NBAP), however, the initial draft’s objective of 30×30 was omitted from the final version, although preserving 30% of our maritime territory remains a governmental policy. At the moment, approximately 13% of the land area is protected, falling below the EU average. However, there has been a significant rise in Natura 2000 sites (established under the EU’s Birds and Habitats Directives), growing from 2% to about 10% lately.

Dr Catherine Farrell, a restoration ecologist based in Co Mayo with a strong history of working with land proprietors within protected regions, expresses agreement with omitting the 30% goal from the NBAP due to the considerable opposition against nature conservation designations. She emphasises that the current focus should be on effective measures in the already safeguarded areas. For this to be possible, Dr Farrell declares that improved communication is needed starting from the top tier of government departments. According to her, statutory instruments and their intended following are under-understood. Consequently, the advice given to farmers via the farm advisory network as well as how the sites are inspected by the agriculture department require an overhaul.

Farrell emphasises the key role people play in conservation. She argues that personal interactions, not letters, are required to effectively communicate the designation and importance of a conservation site. She notes that many individuals she has worked with were only semi-aware of their site’s designation.

She appreciates recent efforts towards implementing “results-oriented” schemes, where farmers receive payment based on conservation achievements. However, she worries these programmes are too temporary. She emphasises the importance of lengthy engagement with farmers, acknowledging the beneficial contributions they can make.

She asserts there exists a desire to cooperate with nature, but insists we must look back and learn from previous mistakes.

The NBAP promises to identify new conservation territories, though it does not specify a particular goal. It recognises the need to enhance the state of our existing protected areas. Additionally, it acknowledges the value of establishing new national parks and nature reserves, on both public and private lands, as effective and well-received ways to involve locals with their natural surroundings.

It is within reach, and of utmost necessity, to dedicate 30% of Ireland’s land to nature conservation in response to the ecological crisis. Following the country’s endorsement of the Cop15 agreement in Montreal, the responsibility to act cannot be delegated to other nations. Alongside this, a new approach is required, one that is less hierarchical and promotes better collaboration between government agencies and local communities, and which also has a more human-centric ethos.

Further updates can be obtained directly on your mobile through push alerts, and by following The Irish Times on WhatsApp. Be sure to check our In The News podcast, now updated daily, for the latest episode.

Condividi