Biodiversity Conservation
In the late 20th century, the conservation of biological diversity became recognized as an urgent issue for humanity. This is largely due to the scientific observation of the significant decline in biodiversity accompanying the industrialization that spread widely in the 19th and 20th centuries. Two key texts emerged from a number of preparatory meetings that rang the danger bell at the global level: publication of the Global Biodiversity Strategy and the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) signed at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro (both in 1992). Biodiversity is considered at various levels: species diversity, genetic diversity, and ecosystems diversity. Both human diversity and biodiversity are key to stability of human and natural communities. Yet, threats to biodiversity around the world have never been more severe than currently recorded in history. These threats come from human population expansion, misguided economic policies, rampant consumerism, and a culture of unsustainable growth, among others. Sustainability is viewed as the ability of our environment to meet both current and future needs. The benefits of biodiversity are many and discussed at length in the literature (Pimentel et al., 1997; Montgomery, 2002; Kaimowitz and Sheil, 2007). They include:
1) Ethical and moral value: it is logical to protect nature because it existed independent of humans and needs to be valued. Organisms have in such analysis an inherent right to not be wiped out.
2) Aesthetic value: Humans derive so much from the biodiversity of nature. The use of our five senses to enjoy nature is biologically ingrained in us. This aesthetic enjoyment may also include things like enjoying flowers in the spring, watching birds, taking hikes, engaging in nature sports, ecotourism, and much more.
3) Utilitarian value: SP is a key part of the Fertile Crescent where humans first developed agriculture. Traditional agriculture was sustainable as Palestinian ancestors (Canaanites) managed to cultivate an enormous variety of plants. But they also developed terracing and irrigation systems that were amazingly resilient, with some functioning terraces and dykes used for the past 5000 years. Associated with all these is a cultural heritage that is remarkable and unique. Since Palestinians are the indigenous people of SP, our work is what we do as the local people. The activities of the local people are here highlighted through examples from GOs, NGOs, and academia over the past five years. Studies are limited in this area but some documentation has been found about medicinal plants as a cultural heritage (Canaan, 1928; Crowfoot and Baldensperger, 1932; Ali-Shtayeh et al., 1998, 2008; Ali-Shtayeh et al., 2015; Ali-Shtayeh et al., 2016; Jamous et al., 2018; Mourad Hanna et al., 2021). In SP, research is needed on natural resource evaluation (Ignatyeva et al., 2022).
4) Ecological value: Nature and the web/network of nature evolved over billions of years provide us with oxygen and a balanced ecosystem that is sustainable.
Valuing/valorizing diversity has recently focused on the use of terms like “ecosystem services” and “nature’s contribution to people” (IPBES, 2019a,b; Pascual et al., 2017; Díaz et al., 2018; Kadykalo et al., 2019; Hill et al., 2021; Faith, 2021). The constituents of well-being related to this are security, basic material for good life, health, and good social relationships (CBD, 2010a).
It is important to appreciate that conserving biodiversity gives humanity options (of incalculable value) for the future (Faith 2021). Increasingly, the World is cognizant that biodiversity valuation (ecosystem services) and conservation can only be done with collective work involving indigenous communities; a Biocultural system that includes human diversity with the rest of biodiversity (Bohensky and Maru, 2011; ICCA, 2017; Gavin et al., 2018; McElwee et al., 2020; Reyes-García et al., 2021; see also Local Biodiversity Outlooks). As an example of the use of indigenous knowledge, see this module relating to climate change. In line with the Nagoya Protocols, indigenous peoples and local communities must have access and benefit sharing (see also: ICCA Consortium, 2017; Lorek et al., 2021; Tomany et al., 2021).
Increasingly, indigenous knowledge of value and management of ecosystems and biodiversity are recognized as key components for sustainability (Karki et al., 2017; Nakashima, D. and Krupnik, 2018; Roué and Molnar, 2017). Core principles of community-centered conservation include (Armitage et al. 2020): (a) building multilevel networks and collaborative relationships needed to co-produce conservation solutions; (b) promoting equity and recognizing the central role of women as agents of positive change in conservation efforts across scales; (c) reframing conservation action through the lens of reconciliation and redress (e.g. responding to injustices from land grabs and territorial enclosures); (d) ensuring a rights-based approach to conservation action in which community agency, access and decision making autonomy are supported; and (e) revitalizing the customary and local institutions that provide legitimate and adaptive strategies for the stewardship of biodiversity. The changes in ecosystem conditions include changes in provisioning, regulating, and supporting services that lead to better human wellbeing and preserving nature for its intrinsic value (Slingenberg et al., 2009). In many cases, countries and communities have also started to use qualitative and quantitative methods to (e)valuate ecosystem services (Ignatyeva et al., 2022). Biodiversity conservation goes hand-in-hand with poverty reduction especially in developing countries like SP (Adams et al., 2004; Sunderlin et al., 2005; Roe et al., 2012; Hubacek et al., 2017). Policies addressing threats to biodiversity including climate change issues have social impact that should be taken into consideration (Lamb et al., 2020; Vogel et al., 2021).
Value to nature and natural capital can be accounted for using the SEEA-framework as part of national accounts to inform decision-making and implementation. Integrating nature and biodiversity considerations in Environmental Fiscal Reforms is needed, as well as taxation models and fiscal incentives for achieving the three objectives of the Convention. Application of innovative digital technologies for mainstreaming biodiversity into planning, development, finance and business, in a way that protects privacy while providing citizens, the private sector and governments with access to data and information for better decision-making related to mainstreaming is possible. Businesses in all relevant economic sectors and at all levels, and especially large and transnational companies and those with the most significant impacts on biodiversity, must actively transition towards sustainable technologies and practices, including their supply, trade and value chains, demonstrating decreasing negative and increasingly net positive impacts on ecosystems and their services to people, biodiversity and human well-being and health. Institutions at all levels should incorporate biodiversity loss in their risk analyses and have increasingly net positive impacts on biodiversity, including by financing activities that can verifiably demonstrate biodiversity benefits or co-benefits.
Women, youth and marginalized communities’ empowerment in biodiversity conservation is critical. Proper distribution of wealth and benefits relies on increased accountability at the local and national levels, as well as labor organizing (farmers/agricultural workers’ unions). It is also possible to develop ecovillages in SP (Weihe, 2016). Equitable benefit from nature must be ensured via proper distribution of wealth and benefits (Buchs, 2021) and this is important for conservation efforts (Tallis et al., 2008). In the region, natural resources are not equitably distributed and this is harmful for nature and for humans. A good example of this is the catastrophic situation in the Jordan Valley, devastated by Israeli exploitation, including diversion of its water and unfair exploitation of agricultural lands.
Enhancement of the use of ethnoecology and the values of bio-culture can enhance economic activities that are sustainable (e.g. agriculture tourism, increased production from permaculture, etc.) (Manzur, 2013; Toteva et al., 2021). Greater involvement of Palestinians in these areas can provide positive feedback to (both local and global) visitors to their areas, which brings additional solidarity and support. Small-scale farmers should be actively encouraged to engage in ecotourism as a way to supplement their income.
Cost benefit analysis research is needed as well as other researches related to natural resource management as it pertains to biodiversity (e.g. Becker et al., 2014; de Lara and Doyen, 2008; Dombrowsky et al., 2010). Such research should include adapting new technologies such as remote sensing and GIS to natural resource managment (Pettorelli, 2019).
See References in the Publications