INTRODUCTION

The retreat of Aletsch Glacier in the Swiss Alps (situation in 1979, 1991 and 2002), due to global
warming.

Conservation biology matured in the mid- 20th century as ecologists, naturalists, and other
scientists began to collectively research and address issues pertaining to global declines in
biodiversityThe conservation ethic differs from the preservationist ethic, historically lead by
John Muir, who advocate for protected areas devoid of human exploitation or interference for
profit. The conservation ethic advocates for wise stewardship and management of natural
resource production for the purpose of protecting and sustaining biodiversity in species,
ecosystems, the evolutionary process, and human culture and society.Conservation biologists
are concerned with the trends in biodiversity being reported in this era, which has been
labeled by science as the Holocene extinction period, also known as the sixth mass extinction
Rates of decline in biodiversity in this sixth mass extinction match or exceed rates of loss in
the five previous mass extinction events recorded in the fossil record.[87][88][89][90][91] Loss of
biodiversity results in the loss of natural capital that supplies ecosystem goods and services.
The economic value of 17 ecosystem services for the entire biosphere (calculated in 1997)
has an estimated average value of US$ 33 trillion (1012) per year

Aschematic image illustrating the relationship between biodiversity, ecosystem services,

human well-being, and poverty. The illustration shows where conservation action, strategies
and plans can influence the drivers of the current biodiversity crisis at local, regional, to
global scales. In response to the extinction crisis, the research of conservation biologists is
being organized into strategic plans that include principles, guidelines, and tools for the
purpose of protecting biodiversity. Conservation biology is a crisis orientated discipline and it
is multi-disciplinary, including ecological, social, education, and other scientific disciplines
outside of biology. Conservation biologists work in both the field and office, in government,
universities, non-profit organizations and in industry. The conservation of biological diversity
is a global priority in strategic conservation plans that are designed to engage public policy
and concerns affecting local, regional and global scales of communities, ecosystems, and
culturesConserving biodiversity and action plans identify ways of sustaining human well-
being and global economics, including natural capital, market capital, and ecosystem
services]

One of the strategies involves placing a monetary value on biodiversity through biodiversity
banking, of which one example is the Australian Native Vegetation Management Framework.
Other approaches are the creation of gene banks, as well as the creation of gene banks that
have the intention of growing the indigenous species for reintroduction to the ecosystem (e.g.
via tree nurseries, ...)[99] The eradication of exotic species is also an important method to
preserve the local biodiversity. Exotic species that have become a pest can be identified using
taxonomy (e.g. with DAISY, barcode of life,[100] ...) and can then be eradicated.[101] This
method however can only be used against a large group of a certain exotic organism due to
the econimic cost. Other measures contributing to the preservation of biodiversity include:
the reduction of pesticide use and/or a switching to organic pesticides, ... These measures
however, are of less importance than the preserving of rural lands, reintroduction of
indigenous species and the removal of exotic species. Finally, if the continued preservation of
native organisms in an area can be guaranteed, efforts can be made in trying to reintroduce
eliminated native species back into the environment. This can be done by first determining
which species were indigenous to the area, and then reintroducing them. This determination
can be done using databases as the Encyclopedia_of_life, Global Biodiversity Information
Facility, ... Extermination is usually done with either (ecological) pesticides, or natural
predators

OBJECTIVE

Biodiversity describes the organisms in the natural environment, which provide the
ecosystem services that form our natural capital: fresh water, clean air, soil fertility and
biological pest control. ◦Biodiversity is fundamental to the future sustainability of the world’s
natural resources. A recent report by the World Resources Institute values the ‘free’
ecosystem services at over $30 trillion to the global economy each year. Conservation of
biodiversity, on economic grounds alone, needs to become core business in the management
of our natural resources.

These ecosystem services are under threat, globally and nationally, because the world is
facing a wave of extinctions at a scale not seen before in human history. Australia has a
unique responsibility to conserve our biodiversity: we are a wealthy nation and are custodians
of one of 17 megadiverse nations. Over 80 per cent of our plants and animals are endemic to
Australia – that is, they are found nowhere else in the world.

In 1996 Australia recognised the importance of biodiversity conservation when the Council
of Australian Governments (COAG) adopted the National Strategy for the Conservation of
Australia’s Biological Diversity. In 2000, ANZECC commissioned a progress report. The
report found that whilst significant advances had been made since 1996, a number of
objectives had not been achieved.

This document sets objectives and targets for ten priority outcomes which the
Commonwealth, States and Territories should pursue between now and 2005. The challenges
and opportunities for biodiversity conservation are not uniform across Australia, so there will
be some regional variation in the timing of the application of these targets.

The priority actions are to:

1. protect and restore native vegetation and terrestrial ecosystems

2. protect and restore freshwater ecosystems
3. protect and restore marine and estuarine ecosystems
4. control invasive species
5. mitigate dryland salinity
6. promote ecologically sustainable grazing
7. minimise impacts of climate change on biodiversity
8. maintain and record indigenous peoples’ ethnobiological knowledge
9. improve scientific knowledge and access to information
10. introduce institutional reform
These priority outcomes, objectives and targets complement the Prime Minister’s National
Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality initiative adopted by COAG in November 2000;
the National Framework for Management and Monitoring of Australia’s Native Vegetation;
the National Greenhouse Strategy; the Ramsar Convention Strategic Plan 1997-2002; the
Asia-Pacific Migratory Waterbird Conservation Strategy and Shorebird Action Plan 2000-
2005; and COAG water:

IMPORTANCE

Protected areas are an extremely important part of programs to conserve biodiversity

and ecosystems, especially for sensitive habitats (R5). Recent assessments have shown that
at the global and regional scales, the existence of current PAs, while essential, is not
sufficient for conservation of the full range of biodiversity. Protected areas need to be better
located, designed, and managed to deal with problems like lack of representativeness,
impacts of human settlement within protected areas, illegal harvesting of plants and animals,
unsustainable tourism, impacts of invasive alien species, and vulnerability to global change.
Marine and freshwater ecosystems are even less well protected than terrestrial systems,
leading to increasing efforts to expand PAs in these biomes. Efforts to expand marine
protected areas are also spurred by strong evidence of positive synergies between
conservation within PAs and sustainable use immediately outside their boundaries (C18).
However, marine protected area management poses special challenges, as enforcement is
difficult and much of the world’s oceans lie outside national jurisdictions.

Protected area design and management will need to take into account the impacts of
climate change. The impacts of climate change will increase the risk of extinctions of certain
species and change the nature of ecosystems. Shifts in species distribution as a result of
climate change are well documented (C4, C19, C25). Today’s species conservation plans
may incorporate adaptation and mitigation aspects for this threat, drawing on existing tools to
help assess species’ vulnerability to climate change. Corridors and other habitat design
aspects to give flexibility to protected areas are effective precautionary strategies. Improved
management of habitat corridors and production ecosystems between protected areas will
help biodiversity adapt to changing conditions (R5)

5 What actions can be taken?METHODOLOGY

Many of the actions that have been taken to conserve biodiversity and promote its
sustainable use have been successful in limiting biodiversity loss and homogenization to
rates lower than they would otherwise have been in the absence of such actions.
However, further significant progress will require a portfolio of actions that build on
cur-rent initiatives to address important direct and indirect drivers of biodiversity loss
and ecosystem service degradation. Less biodiversity would exist today had not
communities, NGOs, governments, and, to a growing extent, business and industry
taken actions to conserve biodiversity, mitigate its loss, and support its sustainable use.

CONCLUSION

Many traditional cultural practices have served to protect components of biodiversity

important for utilitarian or spiritual reasons. Similarly, a number of community-based
resource management programs have slowed the loss of biodiversity while contributing
benefits to the people by placing community-level benefits as central objectives for
sustainable management. Substantial investments have also been made by NGOs,
governments, and the private sector to reduce negative impacts on biodiversity, protect
threatened biodiversity, and use biodiversity sustainably.

To achieve greater progress toward biodiversity conservation, it will be necessary (but

not sufficient) to strengthen response options that are designed with the conservation
and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystem services as the primary goal.

Responses with a primary goal of conservation that have been partly successful and
could be further strengthened include the following:

 Protected areas. Protected areas, including those managed primarily for

biodiversity conservation and those managed for a wide range of sustainable
uses, are extremely important, especially in environments where biodiversity
loss is sensitive to changes in key drivers. PA systems are most successful if
they are designed and managed in the context of an ecosystem approach, with
due regard to the importance of corridors and interconnectivity of PAs and to
external threats such as pollution, climate change, and invasive species. At the
global and regional scales, however, the current system of protected areas is
not sufficient for conservation of all (or even representative) components of
biodiversity. PAs need to be better located, designed, and man-aged to deal
with problems like lack of representativeness, impacts of human settlement
within protected areas, illegal harvesting of plants and animals, unsustainable
tourism, impacts of invasive species, and vulnerability to global change.
Marine and freshwater ecosystems are even less well protected than terrestrial
ones, although new developments in marine protected areas and PA networks
show promise. Marine protected areas often provide striking examples of the
potential synergies between conservation and sustainable use, since
appropriately placed ones can significantly increase fishery harvests in
adjoining areas. In all cases, better policy and institutional options are needed
to promote the fair and equitable sharing of costs and benefits of protected
areas at all levels.
 Species protection and recovery measures for threatened species.
Considerable scope exists to conserve and use biodiversity sustainably through
more effective management of individual species. Although “habitat-based”
approaches to species conservation are critical, they are by no means a
replacement for “species-based” approaches, and likewise, species-based
approaches are insufficient for habitat conservation.
 Ex situ and in situ conservation of genetic diversity. The bene-fits from ex situ
conservation of genetic diversity, such as gene-banks, are substantial. While
the technology continues to improve, the major constraint is ensuring that an
adequate range of genetic diversity is contained within the ex situ facilities and
that these remain in the public domain where, for example, they can serve the
needs of poor farmers. In addition, significant benefits can be gained through
better integration of ex situ and in situ conservation strategies, particularly for
species that are difficult to maintain in ex situ facilities.
 Ecosystem restoration. Ecosystem restoration activities are now common in
many countries and include actions to restore almost all types of ecosystems,
including wetlands, forests, grasslands, estuaries, coral reefs, and mangroves.
Restoration will become an increasingly important response as more
 ecosystems become degraded and as demands for their services continue to
grow. Ecosystem restoration, however, is generally far costlier than protecting
the original ecosystem, and it is rare that all of the biodiversity and services of
of a system can be restored.

 Public awareness, communication, and education. Education and

communication programs have both informed and changed preferences for
biodiversity conservation and have improved implementation of biodiversity
responses. Improved communication and education to the public and to
decision-makers are essential to achieve the objectives of environmental
conventions, sustainable development (including the Johannesburg Plan of
Implementation), and sustainable management of natural resources more
generally. While the importance of communication and education is well
recognized, providing the human and financial resources to undertake
effective work is a continuing barrier.

What is the value of biodiversity?

IMPORTANCE

Protected areas are an extremely important part of programs to conserve biodiversity

and ecosystems, especially for sensitive habitats (R5). Recent assessments have shown that
at the global and regional scales, the existence of current PAs, while essential, is not
sufficient for conservation of the full range of biodiversity. Protected areas need to be better
located, designed, and managed to deal with problems like lack of representativeness,
impacts of human settlement within protected areas, illegal harvesting of plants and animals,
unsustainable tourism, impacts of invasive alien species, and vulnerability to global change.
Marine and freshwater ecosystems are even less well protected than terrestrial systems,
leading to increasing efforts to expand PAs in these biomes. Efforts to expand marine
protected areas are also spurred by strong evidence of positive synergies between
conservation within PAs and sustainable use immediately outside their boundaries (C18).
However, marine protected area management poses special challenges, as enforcement is
difficult and much of the world’s oceans lie outside national jurisdictions.

Protected area design and management will need to take into account the impacts of
climate change. The impacts of climate change will increase the risk of extinctions of certain
species and change the nature of ecosystems. Shifts in species distribution as a result of
climate change are well documented (C4, C19, C25). Today’s species conservation plans
may incorporate adaptation and mitigation aspects for this threat, drawing on existing tools to
help assess species’ vulnerability to climate change. Corridors and other habitat design
aspects to give flexibility to protected areas are effective precautionary strategies. Improved
management of habitat corridors and production ecosystems between protected areas will
help biodiversity adapt to changing conditions (R5)

IMPORTANCE

Protected areas are an extremely important part of programs to conserve biodiversity

and ecosystems, especially for sensitive habitats (R5). Recent assessments have shown that
at the global and regional scales, the existence of current PAs, while essential, is not
sufficient for conservation of the full range of biodiversity. Protected areas need to be better
located, designed, and managed to deal with problems like lack of representativeness,
impacts of human settlement within protected areas, illegal harvesting of plants and animals,
unsustainable tourism, impacts of invasive alien species, and vulnerability to global change.
Marine and freshwater ecosystems are even less well protected than terrestrial systems,
leading to increasing efforts to expand PAs in these biomes. Efforts to expand marine
protected areas are also spurred by strong evidence of positive synergies between
conservation within PAs and sustainable use immediately outside their boundaries (C18).
However, marine protected area management poses special challenges, as enforcement is
difficult and much of the world’s oceans lie outside national jurisdictions.

Protected area design and management will need to take into account the impacts of
climate change. The impacts of climate change will increase the risk of extinctions of certain
species and change the nature of ecosystems. Shifts in species distribution as a result of
climate change are well documented (C4, C19, C25). Today’s species conservation plans
may incorporate adaptation and mitigation aspects for this threat, drawing on existing tools to
help assess species’ vulnerability to climate change. Corridors and other habitat design
aspects to give flexibility to protected areas are effective precautionary strategies. Improved
management of habitat corridors and production ecosystems between protected areas will
help biodiversity adapt to changing conditions (R5)

Finding 3. Improved valuation techniques and information on ecosystem services tells

us that although many individuals benefit from the actions and activities that lead to
biodiversity loss and ecosystem change, the costs borne by society of such changes is
often higher. Even in instances where our knowledge of benefits and costs is incomplete,
the use of the precautionary approach may be warranted when the costs associated with
ecosystem changes may be high or the changes irreversible.

In a number of existing studies of changes in economic value associated with changes to

biodiversity in specific locations (such as the conversion of mangrove forests, draining of
wetlands, and clear-felling of forests), the total economic cost of ecosystem conversion
(including both market and nonmarket values of ecosystem services) is found to be
significant and to sometimes exceed the benefits of the habitat conversion. Despite this, in a
number of these cases conversion was promoted because the cost associated with the loss of
ecosystem services was not internalized, because the private gains were significant (although
less than the public losses), and sometimes also because subsidies distorted the relative costs
and benefits. Often, the majority of local inhabitants were disenfranchised by the changes.

A country’s ecosystems and its ecosystem services represent a capital asset, but the
benefits that could be attained through better management of this asset are poorly
reflected in conventional economic indicators. A country could cut its forests and deplete
its fisheries and this would show only as a positive gain to GDP despite the loss of the capital
asset. When the decline in these “natural capital assets” is factored into the measures of
national wealth, the estimates of that wealth decline significantly for countries with
economies that are especially dependent on natural resources. Some countries that appeared
to have positive growth in the 1970s and 1980s, for example, actually experienced a net loss
of capital assets, effectively undermining the sustainability of any gains they may have
achieved.

The costs resulting from ecosystem “surprises” can be very high. The United States, for
example, spends hundreds of millions of dollars each year controlling alien species that were
initially rare and of little consequence but eventually became invasive. Increased insurance
premiums for floods, fires, and other extreme events have risen dramatically in recent
decades. Changes in ecosystems are sometimes important factors in contributing to the
increased frequency and severity of the impacts of these extreme events. Such surprises
suggest that the precautionary principle may apply to conserving biodiversity even where
data are insufficient to calculate costs and benefits.

The costs and risks associated with biodiversity loss are expected to increase, and to fall
disproportionately on the poor. As biodiversity and the provision of some ecosystem
services decrease, the marginal value of biodiversity increases. There are also distributional
impacts that are not necessarily borne out in economic valuation studies, since the poor have
a relatively low “willingness to pay.” Many aspects of biodiversity decline have a
disproportionate impact on poor people. The decline in fish populations, for example, has
major implications for artisanal fishers and the communities that depend on fish as an
important source of protein. As dryland resources are degraded, it is the poor and vulnerable
who suffer the most.

Tools now exist for a far more complete computation of the different values people place
on biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, some ecosystem services are more
difficult to value, and therefore many decisions continue to be made in the absence of a
detailed analysis of the full costs, risks, and benefits. Economists typically seek to identify
the various reasons why biodiversity and ecosystems are valuable to people. These include
the fact that ecosystems directly or indirectly support people’s own consumption (often
referred to as use value) or that they support the consumption of other people or other species
(often referred to as non-use value). Various valuation methods are now available to estimate
these different sources of value. Despite the existence of these tools, only provisioning
ecosystem services are routinely valued. Most supporting, cultural, and regulating services
are not valued because the willingness of people to pay for these services—which are not

privately owned or traded—cannot be directly observed or measured.

There is substantial scope for greater protection of biodiversity through actions justified
on their economic merits for material or other benefits to human well-being.
Conservation of biodiversity is essential as a source of particular biological resources, to
maintain different ecosystem services, to maintain the resilience of ecosystems, and to
provide options for the future. These benefits that biodiversity provides to people have not
been well reflected in decision-making and resource management, and thus the current rate of
loss of biodiversity is higher than it would be had these benefits been taken into account. (See
Figure 2)
However, the total amount of biodiversity that would be conserved based strictly on
utilitarian considerations is likely to be less than the amount present today (medium
certainty). Even if utilitarian benefits, such as those associated with provisioning and
regulating ecosystem services, were fully taken into account in decision-making, Earth would
still be losing biodiversity. Other utilitarian benefits often “compete” with the benefits of
maintaining greater diversity, and on balance the level of diversity that would exist would be
less than is present today.

Many of the steps taken to increase the production of ecosystem services (such as agriculture)
require the simplification of natural systems, and protecting some other ecosystem services
may not necessarily require the conservation of biodiversity (such as timber from
monoculture plantation forestry). Ultimately, more biodiversity will be conserved if ethical,
equitable distribution and spiritual concerns are taken into account (the outermost area in
Figure 2) than if only the operation of imperfect and incomplete markets is relied on.

What is the problem?EXPLANATION

CONSERVATION OF BIODIVERSITY

The source document for this Digest states: "Signed by 150 government leaders at
the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, the Convention on Biological Diversity is dedicated to
promoting sustainable development. Conceived as a practical tool for translating the
principles of Agenda 21 into reality, the Convention recognizes that biological
diversity is about more than plants, animals and micro organisms and their
ecosystems – it is about people and our need for food security, medicines, fresh air
and water, shelter, and a clean and healthy environment in which to live

Finding 1. Human actions are fundamentally, and to a significant extent irreversibly,

changing the diversity of life on Earth, and most of these changes represent a loss of
biodiversity. Changes in important components of biological diversity were more rapid
in the past 50 years than at any time in human history. Projections and scenarios
indicate that these rates will continue, or accelerate, in the future.

Virtually all of Earth’s ecosystems have now been dramatically transformed through
human actions. More land was converted to cropland in the 30 years after 1950 than in the
150 years between 1700 and 1850. Between 1960 and 2000, reservoir storage capac-ity
quadrupled, and as a result the amount of water stored behind large dams is estimated to be
three to six times the amount of water flowing through rivers at any one time. Some 35% of
man-groves have been lost in the last two decades in countries where adequate data are
available (encompassing about half of the total mangrove area). Already 20% of known coral
reefs have been destroyed and another 20% degraded in the last several decades. Although
the most rapid changes in ecosystems are now taking place in developing countries, industrial
countries historically experienced comparable changes.
Over half of the 14 biomes that the MA assessed have experi-enced a 20–50% conversion to
human use, with temperate and Mediterranean forests and temperate grasslands being the
most affected (approximately three quarters of these biome’s native habitat has been replaced
by cultivated lands). In the last 50 years, rates of conversion have been highest in tropical and
sub-tropical dry forests.

Globally, the net rate of conversion of some ecosystems has begun to slow, although in
some instances this is because little habitat remains for further conversion. Generally,
opportunities for further expansion of cultivation are diminishing in many regions of the
world as the finite proportion of land suitable for intensive agriculture continues to decline.
Increased agricul-tural productivity is also diminishing pressures for agricultural expansion.
Since 1950, cropland areas in North America, Europe, and China have stabilized, and they
even decreased in Europe and China. Cropland areas in the former Soviet Union have
decreased since 1960. Within temperate and boreal zones, forest cover increased by
approximately 3 million hectares per year in the 1990s, although about 40% of this increase
consisted of forest plantations.

Across a range of taxonomic groups, the population size or range (or both) of the
majority of species is declining. Studies of amphibians globally, African mammals, birds in
agricultural lands, British butterflies, Caribbean and IndoPacific corals, and commonly
harvested fish species show declines in populations of the majority of species. Exceptions
include species that have been protected in reserves, that have had their particular threats
(such as overexploitation) eliminated, and that tend to thrive in land-scapes that have been
modified by human activity. Marine and freshwater ecosystems are relatively less studied
than terrestrial systems, so overall biodiversity is poorly understood; for those species that are
well studied, biodiversity loss has occurred through population extirpation and constricted
distributions.

Figure 1 Extiction rates

Over the past few hundred years, humans have increased species extinction rates by as
much as 1,000 times background rates that were typical over Earth’s history. (See
Figure 1) There are approximately 100 well-documented extinctions of birds, mammals, and
amphibians over the last 100 years—a rate 100 times higher than background rates. If less
well documented but highly probable extinctions are included, the rate is more than 1,000
times higher than background rates.

The distribution of species on Earth is becoming more homogenous. By homogenous, we

mean that the differences between the set of species at one location and the set of species at
another location are, on average, diminishing. Two factors are responsible for this trend.
First, species unique to particular regions are experiencing higher rates of extinction. Second,
high rates of invasion by and introductions of species into new ranges are accelerating in pace
with growing trade and faster transporta-tion. Currently, documented rates of species
introductions in most regions are greater than documented rates of extinction, which can lead
to anomalous, often transient increases in local diversity. The consequences of
homogenization depend on the aggressiveness of the introduced species and the services they
either bring (such as when introduced for forestry or agriculture) or impair (such as when loss
of native species means loss of options and biological insurance).

Between 10% and 50% of well-studied higher taxonomic groups (mammals, birds,
amphibians, conifers, and cycads) are currently threatened with extinction, based on
IUCN–World Conservation Union criteria for threats of extinction. Some 12% of bird
species, 23% of mammals, and 25% of conifers are currently threatened with extinction. In
addition, 32% of amphibians are threatened with extinction, but information is more limited
and this may be an underestimate. Higher levels of threat (52%) have been found in the
cycads, a group of evergreen palm-like plants. Aquatic (including both marine and
freshwater) organisms, however, have not been tracked to the same degree as terrestrial ones,
masking what may be similarly alarming threats of extinction (low certainty).

Genetic diversity has declined globally, particularly among domesticated species. Since
1960 there has been a fundamental shift in the pattern of intra-species diversity in farmers’
fields and farming systems as a result of the “Green Revolution.” Intensification of
agricultural systems, coupled with specialization by plant breeders and the harmonizing
effects of globalization, has led to a substantial reduction in the genetic diversity of
domesticated plants and animals in agricultural systems. Such declines in genetic diversity
lower the resilience and adaptability of domesticated species. Some of these on-farm losses of
crop genetic diversity have been partially offset by the maintenance of genetic diversity in
seed banks. In addition to cultivated systems, the extinction of species and loss of unique
populations (including commercially important marine fishes) that has taken place has
resulted in the loss of unique genetic diversity contained in those species and populations.
This loss reduces overall fitness and adaptive potential, and it limits the prospects for
recovery of species whose populations are reduced to low levels.

All scenarios explored in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment project continuing

rapid conversion of ecosystems in the first half of the twenty-first century.Roughly 10–
20% (low to medium certainty) of current grassland and forestland is projected to be
converted to other uses between now and 2050, mainly due to the expansion of agriculture
and, second, due to the expansion of cities and infrastructure. The habitat losses projected in
the MA scenarios will lead to global extinctions as species numbers approach equilibrium
with the remnant habitat. The equilibrium number of plant species is projected to be reduced
by roughly 10–15% as a result of habitat loss over the period 1970–2050 in the MA scenarios
(low certainty), but this projection is likely to be an underestimate as it does not consider
reductions due to stresses other than habitat loss, such as climate change and pollution.
Similarly, modification of river water flows will drive losses of fish species.

Source & ©: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

6. What actions can be taken to conserve biodiversity?CONCLUSION

See also our summaries on:

Agriculture

Fisheries

Forests

6.1 Protected areas are an essential part of conservation programs, but they are not sufficient
by themselves to protect the full range of biodiversity and can be difficult to enforce. To be
successful, sites for protected areas need to be carefully chosen, ensuring that all regional
ecosystems are well represented, and the areas need to be well designed and effectively
managed. More...

6.2 Market tools, such as direct payments for ecosystem services or transfers of ownership
rights to private individuals, can provide economic incentives to conserve biodiversity and to
use ecosystem services sustainably. More...

6.3 Prevention and early intervention have proven to be the most successful and cost-
effective way of tacklinginvasive species. Once an invasive species has become established,
its control and particularly its eradication through the use of chemicals or through the
introduction of other species is not necessarily effective and is extremely difficult and costly.
More...

6.4 To be conserved, biodiversity must be integrated into the agriculture, fishery, and
forestry sectors. These sectors are directly dependent on biodiversity and affect it directly.
The private sector can make significant contributions, for example by adopting certain
agricultural practices. Many companies now show greater corporate responsibility and are
preparing their own biodiversity action plans. More...

6.5 Strong institutions at all levels are essential to support biodiversity conservation and the
sustainable use of ecosystems. International agreements need to include enforcement
measures and take into account impacts on biodiversity and possible synergies with other
agreements. Most direct actions to halt or reduce biodiversity loss need to be taken at local or
national level. Suitable laws and policies developed by central governments can enable local
levels of government to provide incentives for sustainable resource management. More...
6.6 Informing all of society about the benefits of conserving biodiversity, and explicitly
considering trade-offs between different options in an integrated way, helps maximize the
benefits to society. Ecosystem restoration is generally far more expensive than protecting the
original ecosystem, but is becoming increasingly important as more areas become degraded.
More...

6.7 Direct and indirect drivers of biodiversity loss must be addressed to better protect
biodiversity and ecosystem services. Possible actions include eliminating harmful subsidies,
promoting sustainable intensification of agriculture, adapting to climate change, limiting the
increase in nutrient levels in soil and water, assessing the full economic value of ecosystem
services, and increasing the transparency of decision making processes. More...

TWO TYPES OF CONSERVATION EXPLANATION

insitu conservation maintains not only the genetic diversity of species, but also the
evolutionary adaptations that enable them to adapt continually to shifting environmental
conditions, such as changes in pest populations or climate. In situ conservation also ensures
that along with target species, a host of other interlinked species are also preserved as a by-
product. It is generally cheaper than ex situ methods (although not cheap). It may often be
the only conservation option, for example for species with recalcitrant seeds.

In situ conservation measures involve designating specific areas as protected sites.

Protection may be offered at various levels, from complete protection and restriction of
access, through various levels of permitted human use. In practice, complete protection is
rarely necessary or advisable in a terrestrial context. Human beings have been a major part
of the landscape for many thousands of years. Over the course of that time, human cultures
have emerged and adapted to the local environment, discovering, using and altering biotic
resources. Many areas that now appear ‘natural’ bear the hallmarks of millennia of human
influence. Other species have evolved along with that influence and in many cases require
the disturbance provided by humans to provide the necessary conditions for their survival. In
other words, it is rarely advisable to relegate the countryside to the status of a museum piece.

This applies particularly in the less economically developed areas of the world, where in
many cases, the livelihood of the local people depends on using the natural resources
available to them. Prohibiting the use of such resources in protected areas means that
expensive enforcement measures usually have to be put in place. It is far better to involve
local people in conservation and to find creative ways for them to make a sustainable living
while still protecting valuable habitats or species.

The biosphere reserve concept has been developed through the Man and Biosphere (MAB)
Programme of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
(UNESCO). Biosphere reserves are an attempt to reconcile the problems of conserving
biodiversity and biological resources, with sustainable use of natural resources for people.
They form an international network of sites, nominated by national governments, but
designated by UNESCO. The first reserves were nominated as long ago as 1976. By 2001, a
network of 393 reserves in 94 countries had been developed.     

Ex Situ Conservation - out of the natural habitat

(Species-based)
 Zoos - These may involve captive breeding programmes,
 Aquaria - research, public information and education
 Plant Collections - breeding programmes and seed storage

ZOOS

In the past, zoos were mainly display facilities for the purpose of public enjoyment and
education. As large numbers of the species traditionally on display have become rarer in the
wild, many zoos have taken on the additional role of building up numbers through captive
breeding programmes.

 Diseases
The introduction of new diseases to the habitat, which can decimate existing wild
populations. Alternatively, the loss of resistance to local diseases in captive-bred
populations.

 Behaviour
Behaviour of captive-bred species is also a  problem. Some behaviour is genetically
determined and innate, but much has to be learned from other adults of the species, or
by experience. Captive-bred populations lack the in situ learning of their wild
relatives and are therefore at a huge disadvantage in the wild. In one case of
reintroduction, a number of monkeys starved because they had no concept of having
to search for food to eat - it had always been supplied to them in captivity. In the next
attempt, the captive monkeys were taught that they had to look for food, by hiding it
in their cages, rather than just supplying it. 

 Genetic Races
Reintroduced populations may be of an entirely different genetic make-up to original
populations. This may mean that there are significant differences in reproduction
habits and timing, as well as differences in general ecology. Reintroduction of
individuals of a species into an area where the species has previously become extinct,
is in many cases just like introducing a foreigner. The Large Copper Butterfly is a
good example of this. Although extinct in Britain, it persists in continental Europe.
There have been over a dozen attempts to re-establish it in Britain over the last
century, but none have been successful. This is probably due to the differing ecology
of the introduced races. Replacement of extinct populations by reintroduction from
other areas may not therefore be an option.

 Habitat
The habitat must be there for reintroduction to take place. In many cases, so much
habitat has been destroyed, that areas must first be restored to allow captive
populations to be reintroduced. Suitable existing habitats will also (unless the species
is extinct in the wild) usually already contain wild members of the species. In this
case, it is likely that within the habitat, there are already as many individuals as the
 habitat can support. The introduction of new individuals will only lead to stress and
tension as individuals fight for limited territory and resources such as food. In this
case, nothing positive has been accomplished by reintroduction, it has merely
increased the stress on the species. It may even in some cases result in a decrease in
numbers. In contrast, the provision of additional restored habitat nearby can allow
wild populations to expand into it without the need for reintroduction.

Plant collection

Populations of plant species are much easier than animals to maintain artificially. They need less care and their
requirements for particular habitat conditions can be provided more readily. It is also much easier to breed and
propagate plant species in captivity.

There are roughly 1,500 botanic gardens world-wide, holding 35,000 plant species (more than 15% of the
world’s flora). The Royal Botanic Gardens of England (Kew Gardens) contains an estimated 25,000 species.
IUCN classifies 2,700 of these as rare, threatened or endangered. Many botanic gardens house collections of
particular taxa which are of major conservation value. There is however, a general geographic imbalance. Only
230 of the world’s 1,500 gardens are in the tropics. Considering the greater species richness of the tropics, this
is an imbalance that needs to be addressed.

A more serious problem with ex situ collections involves gaps in coverage of important species, particularly
those of significant value in tropical countries. One of the most serious gaps is in the area of crops of regional
importance, which are not widely traded on world markets. These often have recalcitrant seeds (unsuited to
long-term storage) and are poorly represented in botanic collections. Wild crop relatives are also under-
represented. These are a potential source of genes conferring resistance to diseases, pests and parasites and as
such are a vital gene bank for commercial crops.

Plant genetic diversity can also be preserved ex situ through the use of seed banks. Seeds are small but tough
and have evolved to survive all manner of adverse conditions and a host of attackers. Seeds can be divided into
two main types, orthodox and recalcitrant. Orthodox seeds can be dried and stored at temperatures of -20oC.
Almost all species in a temperate flora can be stored in this way. Surprisingly, many tropical seeds are also
orthodox. Recalcitrant seeds, in contrast, die when dried and frozen in this manner. Acorns of oaks are
recalcitrant and it is believed that so are the seeds of most tropical rain forest trees.

The result of storing seeds under frozen conditions is to slow down the rate at which they lose their ability to
germinate. Seeds of crop plants such as maize and barley could probably survive thousands of years in such
conditions, but for most plants, centuries is probably the norm. This makes seed banking an attractive
conservation option, particularly when all others have failed. It offers an insurance technique for other methods
of conservation.

All of the ex situ conservation methods discussed have their role to play in modern conservation. Generally,
they are more expensive to maintain and should be regarded as complementary to in situ conservation methods.
For example they may be the only option where in situ conservation is no longer possible.