Welcome back Colleagues and Friends to this Cuisine & Culture May 2010 special issue featuring the International Day for Biological Diversity (IDB) starting with a message from the SG below:

                                   MESSAGE from THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

         ON THE INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, 22 May 2010

“The planet’s species and habitats, and the goods and services they provide, form the basis of our wealth, our health and our well-being. Yet, despite repeated global commitments to protect this heritage, the variety of life on Earth continues to decline at an unprecedented rate. Biodiversity loss is moving ecological systems ever closer to a tipping point beyond which they will no longer be able to fulfill their vital functions.

Communities everywhere will reap the negative consequences, but the poorest people and the most vulnerable countries will suffer most. Seventy per cent of the world’s poor live in rural areas, and depend directly on biodiversity for their daily sustenance and income. This is among the reasons why the target set by world leaders in 2002 -- to substantially reduce biodiversity loss by 2010 -- was integrated into the Millennium Development Goals.

The deadline has arrived, yet the deterioration of our natural resources continues apace. To refocus attention on this challenge, the United Nations General Assembly declared 2010 as the International Year of Biodiversity. Later this year, the Assembly will hold a special high-level meeting, back-to-back with the September MDG Summit, to provide much-needed impetus to the Nagoya Biodiversity Summit in October. The goal is a new vision for biodiversity.

That new vision must promote the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and the equitable sharing of the benefits from its use. It must also recognize the close links between our natural capital and our development objectives, a point reflected in the theme for this year’s International Day for Biological Diversity, “biodiversity for development and poverty alleviation”.

In this International Year of Biodiversity, let us reflect on the root causes of biodiversity decline and take action to arrest it. Let us adjust policies and mind-sets to reflect the true value of species and habitats. Let us recognize that biodiversity is life – our life. Let us act now to preserve it, before it is too late.”

Colleagues and Friends, to arrest the unprecedented loss of biodiversity so as to prevent our ecosystems moving ever closer to a tipping point, or a point of no return, Cuisine & Culture is dedicated to the mission of fighting against the continued loss of habitat while maintaining a sustainable ecosystem within which all communities living and interacting with each other in harmony and with the nature in harmony as well.

We mankind must collectively rise to the challenge of stopping the massive extinctions of our own activity!

Massive Extinctions from Human Activity

As well as the need for biodiversity for continued ecosystem survival, from a human perspective, from common drugs to possible cures for cancers, most of our medicine comes from plants, many of which are now endangered.

However, it has long been feared that human activity is causing massive extinctions. A report from Environment New Service (August 2, 1999) says that “The current extinction rate is now approaching 1,000 times the background rate and may climb to 10,000 times the background rate during the next century, if present trends continue. At this rate, one-third to two-thirds of all species of plants, animals, and other organisms would be lost during the second half of the next century (21^st Century/this Century!), a loss that would easily equal those of past extinctions.”

Declining amphibian populationsThe Golden Toad of Monteverde, Costa Rica, was among the first casualties of amphibian declines. Formerly abundant, it was last seen in 1989. (Source: Wikipedia)

Amphibians are particularly sensitive to changes in the environment. Amphibians have been described as a marker species or the equivalent of “canaries of the coal mines” meaning they provide an important signal to the health of biodiversity; when they are stressed and struggling, biodiversity may be under pressure. When they are doing well, biodiversity is probably healthy.

Unfortunately, as has been feared for many years now, amphibian species are declining at an alarming rate.

Dwindling fish stocks

Well authored scientific reports indicate that fish catches are expected to decline dramatically in the world’s tropical regions because of climate change. Furthermore, “in 2006, aquaculture consumed 57 percent of fish meal and 87 percent of fish oil” as industrial fisheries operating in tropical regions have been “scooping up enormous amounts of fish anchovies, herring, mackerel and other small pelagic forage fish to feed to farmed salmon or turn into animal feed or pet food.” This has resulted in higher prices for fish, hitting the poorest the most.

Mass extinctions of marine life due to industrialized fishing have been a concern for many years. Yet, it rarely makes mainstream headlines. A research article in the journal, Science, warned commercial fish and seafood species may all crash by 2048. At the current rate of loss, it is feared the oceans may never recover. Extensive coastal pollution, climate change, over-fishing and the enormously wasteful practice of deep-sea trawling are all contributing to the problem, as Inter Press Service (IPS) summarized.

An example of overfishing that has a ripple-effect on the whole fish-food chain is shark hunting.

Millions of sharks are killed each year from overfishing and trade. Many die accidentally in fishing nets set for tuna and swordfish, while others are caught for their meat or just for their fins.

A demand for shark-fin soup in places like China, Hong Kong and Taiwan is decimating shark populations. Shark fin soup is considered a delicacy (not even a necessity) and can be extremely lucrative. So much money can be obtained just from the fin that fishermen hunting sharks will simply catch sharks and cut off their fins while they are alive, tossing the wriggling shark back into the ocean (to die, as it cannot swim without its fin). This saves a lot of room on fishing boats. Some video footage shown on documentaries such as National Geographic reveal how barbaric and wasteful this practice is.

Sharks are known as the “apex predator” of the seas. That is because in general sharks are at the top of the food chain. Without sufficient shark numbers the balance they provide to the ecosystem is threatened because nature evolved this balance through many millennia.

As World Wildlife Fund (WWF), a global conservation organization notes, “Contrary to popular belief, shark fins have little nutritional value and may even be harmful to your health over the long term as fins have been found to contain high levels of mercury.”

Declining Ocean Biodiversity

Whaling stations like this one in the Faroe Islands is also used to hold hunted dolphins and other animals. (Image source: Wikipedia)

Commercial whaling in the past was for whale oil. With no reason to use whale oil today, commercial whaling is mainly for food, while there is also some hunting for scientific research purposes.

Large scale commercialized whaling was so destructive that in 1986 a moratorium on whaling was set up by the International Whaling Commission (IWC). As early as the mid-1930s, there were international attempts to recognize the impact of whaling and try and make it more sustainable, resulting in the actual set up of the IWC in 1946. Many commercial whaling nations have been part of this moratorium but have various objections and other pressures to try and resume whaling.

Japan is the prime example of hunting whales for the stated aim of scientific research while a lot of skepticism says it is for food. Greenpeace and other organizations often release findings that argue Japan’s whaling to be excessive or primarily for food, and for research as secondary.

Loss of forests equates to a loss of many species © Centre for Science and Environment, Campaign on Forests

A 20-year study has shown that deforestation and introduction of non-native species has led to about 12.5% of the world’s plant species to become critically rare. (In fact, as an example, a study suggests that the Amazon damage is worse than previously thought, due to previously undetected types of selective logging and deforestation.)

A report from the World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development suggests that the forests of the world have been exploited to the point of crisis and that major changes in global forest management strategies would be needed to avoid the devastation.

What also makes this a problem is that many of the endangered species are only found in small areas of land, often within the borders of a single country.

Sustainable Forests or Sustainable Profits? (Image source: Wikipedia)

The overly corporate-led form of globalization that we see today also affects how natural resources are used and what priorities they are used for.

It is true that cutting down forests or converting natural forests into monocultures of pine and eucalyptus for industrial raw material generates revenues and growth. But this growth is based on robbing the forest of its biodiversity and its capacity to conserve soil and water. This growth is based on robbing forest communities of their sources of food, fodder, fuel, fiber, medicine, and security from floods and drought.

We hear more about sustainable forestry practices by the large logging multinationals. However, what does that really mean? Who is it sustainable for? Society and the environment, or the logging companies? By replanting trees that will grow quickly and allow them to be felled for “sustained” logging sounds like a good strategy. However, the trees that are favored for this (eucalyptus) require a lot of water to grow so quickly.

[T]he [eucalyptus] trees achieve this rapid growth by tapping large quantities of groundwater, impoverishing surrounding vegetation and threatening to dry up local water courses.

People and Forests

Quite often we make blanket statements or generalized conclusions that people are the cause of deforestation. While that is true, unfortunately all people around the world are not equal, and it  also follows that some are more responsible for deforestation than others. Often, in forests of the Amazon, Africa, or Asia, forest protection schemes have been promoted that go against indigenous peoples and cultures, rather than work with them.

Misuse of land and resources

How land is used to produce food can have enormous impacts on the environment and its sustainability. And this often has nothing to do with populations.

Junk-food chains, including KFC and Pizza Hut, are under attack from major environmental groups in the United States and other developed countries because of their environmental impact. Intensive breeding of livestock and poultry for such restaurants leads to deforestation, land degradation, and contamination of water sources and other natural resources. For every pound of red meat, poultry, eggs, and milk produced, farm fields lose about five pounds of irreplaceable top soil. The water necessary for meat breeding comes to about 190 gallons per animal per day, or ten times what a normal Indian family is supposed to use in one day, if it gets water at all.

… Overall, animal farms use nearly 40 percent of the world’s total grain production. In the United States, nearly 70 percent of grain production is fed to livestock.

… In Indian Agriculture, women use up to 150 different species of plants (which the biotech industry would call weeds) as medicine, food, or fodder. For the poorest, this biodiversity is the most important resource for survival. … What is a weed for Monsanto (U.S.-based multinational agricultural biotechnology conglomerate) is a medicinal plant or food for rural people.

Because industrial agriculture promotes the use of monocultures, rather than a diversity of crops, the loss of biodiversity is leading to more resource usage, as described above. This as well as other political situations such as the motives for dumping surplus food on to developing countries to undersell the local farmers, leads to further hunger around the world.

Long Term Costs

If ecosystems deteriorate to an unsustainable level, the consequences can be very expensive, economically, to reverse.

In Bangladesh and India, for example, logging of trees and forests means that the floods during the monsoon seasons can be very deadly. Similarly, many avalanches, and mud slides in many regions around the world that have claimed many lives, may have been made worse by the clearing of so many forests, which provide a natural barrier, that can take the brunt of such forces.

As the Centre for Science and Environment mentions, factors such as climate change and environmental degradation can impact regions more so, and make the impacts of severe weather systems even worse than they already are. As they further point out, for poor regions, such as Orissa in India, this is even more of a problem.

Vanishing coral reefs, forests and other ecosystems can all take their toll and even make the effects of some natural events even worse.

The cost of the effects together with the related problems that can arise (like disease, and other illness, or rebuilding and so on) is much more costly than the maintenance and sustainable development practices that could be used instead.

As an example, and assuming a somewhat alarmist scenario, if enough trees and forests and related ecosystems vanish or deteriorate sufficiently:

• Then the oxygen-producing benefits from such ecosystems are threatened.
• The atmosphere would suffer from more pollution.
• The cost to tackle this and the related illnesses, problems and other cascading effects would be enormous (as it can be assumed that industrial pollution could increase, with less natural ecosystems to “soak” it up)
• Furthermore, other species in that ecosystem that would depend on this would be further at risk as well, which would lead to a downward spiral for that ecosystem.

Compare those costs to taking precautionary measures such as protecting forests and promoting more sustainable forms of development. Of course, people will argue that these situations will not occur for whatever reasons. Only when it is too late can others say “told you so” — a perhaps very nasty Catch 22.

Social costs to some segments of society can also be high. Take for example the various indigenous Indians of Latin America. Throughout the region, as aspects of corporate globalization spread, there is growing conflict between land and resources of the indigenous communities, and those required to meet globalization related needs, leading to a growing number of conflicts between indigenous communities and governments and transnational corporations over control of natural resources.”

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) study

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) study leader, Pavan Sukhdev says that IDB should act as a catalyst for galvanizing action to prevent further loss of biodiversity.

“We can and must bring vigorous new thinking to the table to help undo the ongoing damage to our planet's biodiversity' Pavan Sukhdev commented from UNEP New York today.

Awareness of the importance of biodiversity is rising on government and business agendas. There is increasing evidence and understanding about what is being lost in terms of biodiversity, its impacts on the functioning of ecosystems and actions that can be taken to prevent continuing losses.

The economic case for biodiversity provides compelling motivation for the need to urgently address policy and business practice moving forward. TEEB estimated that the Net Present Value (NPV) of annual Natural Capital loss as a result of forest loss is between EUR 1.35 trillion - EUR 3.1 trillion (US$ 2.0 trillion – US$ 4.5 trillion). In September last year TEEB highlighted the coral reef crisis, an ecosystem at a tipping point and one that provides significant human welfare benefits (fisheries, shoreline protection, tourism, recreation and aesthetic value) estimated to be valued as much as US$ 172 billion annually. Within the TEEB reports there are many more examples of the economic argument for conservation and ecological restoration.”

"Good-bye poverty, hello biodiversity"

From the Editor: Cuisine & Culture obtains its materials both online and off line with sources omitted for reason of simplicity but can be provided upon request. Certain materials come in languages other than English that Cuisine & Culture renders into English to the best of its ability. Cuisine & Culture is not in a position to verify the veracity of the materials provided herein. Reader’s discretion is kindly advised.

A Special Acknowledgement of Thanks from Cuisine & Culture

Cuisine & Culture wishes to express its heartfelt thanks to Kevin Wambura of the ITS team here at UNON in Nairobi and Yawtsong Lee, a veteran interpreter at UN headquarters, now retired, for their technical advice and assistance and is hereby extremely pleased to retain them as Technical Advisors to Cuisine & Culture.