56
FINISHING LINES FINISHING LINES FINISHING LINES
The new environmentali$m?
www.frontiersinecology.org The Ecological Society of America
To the wild beat of drums, two dancers in a Chinese lionsuit
hurled themselves around a circle of several dozenscientists and
conservation professionals at a Washington,DC reception. It was the
ceremonial launch, late in 2006, of anew collaboration called The
Natural Capital Project. Thegoal of this unprecedented partnership
between StanfordUniversity, The World Wildlife Fund, and The
NatureConservancy, is to shore up environmental resources inAfrica,
China, and California, while showcasing the linkbetween
conservation and economic welfare. The lion danceis a traditional
appeal for good luck.
Well need it, says Stanford Biology Professor GretchenDaily, who
is spearheading the efforttogether with TNCs Peter Kareivaand WWFs
Taylor Ricketts.Entreaties based on lofty ideals,morals, and
aesthetics have so farfailed to turn back the forces of
envi-ronmental ruin. Daily and colleagueshave therefore been making
the con-troversial case for several years thatits time to emphasize
the bottomline. As we say on Wall Street, ifyou want something
done, youvegot to appeal to fear or greed,Goldman Sachs former
managingdirector Larry Linden told the group.Altruism doesnt get
you very far.
Scientists and economists else-where have come to the same blunt
conclusion, a variation ofwhich could be seen in last years Stern
review: the economics ofclimate change, published in Britain. This
report warned thatthe costs of failure to confront climate change
could run from520% of global GDP, whereas the problem could be
addressedfor 1% of that total.
The basic error in the way we calculate GDPs is thattheyve never
included the huge economic value of ecosys-tems. Forests help
purify water and control soil erosion, forexample, and coral reefs
nurture fish. The Natural CapitalProject will try to correct this
omission by developing newtools and by mapping ecosystem services
to incorporate thevalue of natural life-support systems in land-use
decisionmaking. Daily and other project leaders intend to work
withwould-be investors at all levels of government and
business.They also hope to woo a major constituency often
slightedin previous conservation efforts: impoverished rural
peoplewho live close to the land and are most immediately harmedby
the decline in ecosystem services.
I would dearly like to see the Natural Capital Project orreally,
any meaningful conservation project succeed.However, I do have
three big concerns about this one. First,whos willing to buy?
Several speakers at the Washington con-ference cited ongoing
investments in nature including thenow classic case in which New
York City paid to conserve an
upstate watershed to help ensure cleandrinking water. Chinas
government hassimilarly embarked on a massive tree-planti-ng
program to control soil erosion. But in these and most othercases,
all payments are being made by governments, whoseresources are
limited. There are some enticing examples inwhich people have
actually taxed themselves to pay for conser-vation in Napa, CA, for
example and others where compa-nies, such as Perrier, have paid to
restore the ecosystems onwhich they depend. However, this trend
will have to be rampedup quite a bit before I start feeling more
hopeful.
Second, what is the best way to make the case for naturalassets
over relatively unnatural ones?With nearly one-fifth of the
Amazonforest already lost to logging, ranching,and farming, many
scientists (and non-scientists) are justifiably alarmed.
TheWashington conference was filled withspeculation about funding
sources topreserve standing trees for their ecosys-tem values. Many
attendees werehopeful that parties to the Kyoto cli-mate talks
might endorse a mechanismcalled avoided forestation, in
whichgovernments or corporations needingto reduce their carbon
footprint couldinvest in preserving forests. Yet if buy-ers are
looking for quick carbon stor-age, why wouldnt they choose the
more efficient strategy of growing trees on plantations? I
dontyet see a solution to this problem.
The meeting also featured sharply divergent views on anoth-er
widely supposed forest benefit: the promotion of rainfall.The
Amazon expert Thomas Lovejoy, whose many achieve-ments include
coming up with the debt-for-nature concept,told me he has been
trying to sell Brazils president, Lula daSilva, on a conservation
project based on the assumption that40% of rainfall in the countrys
agricultural south originatesfrom the Amazon forest. Yet at the
same conference, IanCalder, Director of the Centre for Land Use and
WaterResources Research at Newcastle University (Newcastle
uponTyne, UK), gave a presentation concluding that the jurys
stillout on the relationship between forests and rainfall.
Finally, dont people already realize the connection
betweenecosystem loss and long-term financial impacts? Isnt
thegreater problem that humans are short-term thinkers?
Dailyremains optimistic. Theres a lot of uncertainty, in
everythingfrom the basic science to its application in diverse
cultural set-tings around the world, she acknowledges, but were off
to avery promising start.
I wish her and her colleagues luck. They deserve it, and,
likeDaily says, theyll need it.
Katherine Ellisonwww.katherineellison.com
W
WF/
Jill H
atza
i
