top of page


Public·3 members

Biodiversity Conservation In India Pdf Download

Terrestrial biodiversity is thought to be up to 25 times greater than ocean biodiversity.[32] Forests harbour most of Earth's terrestrial biodiversity. The conservation of the world's biodiversity is thus utterly dependent on the way in which we interact with and use the world's forests.[23] A new method used in 2011, put the total number of species on Earth at 8.7 million, of which 2.1 million were estimated to live in the ocean.[33] However, this estimate seems to under-represent the diversity of microorganisms.[34] Forests provide habitats for 80 percent of amphibian species, 75 percent of bird species and 68 percent of mammal species. About 60 percent of all vascular plants are found in tropical forests. Mangroves provide breeding grounds and nurseries for numerous species of fish and shellfish and help trap sediments that might otherwise adversely affect seagrass beds and coral reefs, which are habitats for many more marine species.[23] Forests span around 4 billion acres (nearly a third of the earth's land mass) and are home to approximately 80% of the world's biodiversity. About 1 billion hectares are covered by primary forests. Over 700 million hectares of the world's woods are officially protected.[35][36]

Biodiversity Conservation In India Pdf Download

Philosophically it could be argued that biodiversity has intrinsic aesthetic and spiritual value to mankind in and of itself. This idea can be used as a counterweight to the notion that tropical forests and other ecological realms are only worthy of conservation because of the services they provide.[126]

Scientists including Paul R. Ehrlich and Eileen Crist have argued that population size and growth, along with overconsumption, are significant factors in biodiversity loss and soil degradation,[220][221] The 2019 IPBES Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, and biologists including Ehrlich and Stuart Pimm, have noted that human population growth and overconsumption are the main drivers of species decline.[222][223][224][225] E. O. Wilson, who contends that human population growth has been devastating to the planet's biodiversity, stated that the "pattern of human population growth in the 20th century was more bacterial than primate." He added that when Homo sapiens reached a population of six billion their biomass exceeded that of any other large land dwelling animal species that had ever existed by over 100 times, and that "we and the rest of life cannot afford another 100 years like that."[226] A 2022 study published in Biological Conservation warned that conservation efforts will continue to fail if the primary drivers of biodiversity loss continue to be ignored, including population size and growth.[227] In December 2022 Inger Andersen, the executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme, stated as delegates were meeting for COP 15:

Rates of decline in biodiversity in this sixth mass extinction match or exceed rates of loss in the five previous mass extinction events in the fossil record.[239] Loss of biodiversity results in the loss of natural capital that supplies ecosystem goods and services. From the perspective of the method known as Natural Economy the economic value of 17 ecosystem services for Earth's biosphere (calculated in 1997) has an estimated value of US$33 trillion (3.3x1013) per year.[240] Species today are being wiped out at a rate 100 to 1,000 times higher than baseline, and the rate of extinctions is increasing. This process destroys the resilience and adaptability of life on Earth.[241] The emergence of the sixth mass extinction is considered by conservation biologists, including Rodolfo Dirzo and Paul R. Ehrlich, to be "one of the most critical manifestations of the Anthropocene" and the continued decline of biodiversity constitutes "an unprecedented threat" to the continued existence of human civilization.[242]

The conservation ethic advocates management of natural resources for the purpose of sustaining biodiversity in species, ecosystems, the evolutionary process and human culture and society.[233][248][250][251][252]

Conservation biology is reforming around strategic plans to protect biodiversity.[248][253][254] Preserving global biodiversity is a priority in strategic conservation plans that are designed to engage public policy and concerns affecting local, regional and global scales of communities, ecosystems and cultures.[255] Action plans identify ways of sustaining human well-being, employing natural capital, market capital and ecosystem services.[256][257]

Protected areas, including forest reserves and biosphere reserves, serve many functions including for affording protection to wild animals and their habitat.[263] Protected areas have been set up all over the world with the specific aim of protecting and conserving plants and animals. Some scientists have called on the global community to designate as protected areas of 30 percent of the planet by 2030, and 50 percent by 2050, in order to mitigate biodiversity loss from anthropogenic causes.[264][265] The target of protecting 30% of the area of the planet by the year 2030 (30 by 30) was adopted by almost 200 countries in the 2022 United Nations Biodiversity Conference. At the moment of adoption (December 2022) 17% of land territory and 10% of ocean territory were protected.[266] In a study published 4 September 2020 in Science Advances researchers mapped out regions that can help meet critical conservation and climate goals.[267]

In September 2020 scientists reported that "immediate efforts, consistent with the broader sustainability agenda but of unprecedented ambition and coordination, could enable the provision of food for the growing human population while reversing the global terrestrial biodiversity trends caused by habitat conversion" and recommend measures such as for addressing drivers of land-use change, and for increasing the extent of land under conservation management, efficiency in agriculture and the shares of plant-based diets.[276][277]

Incentive measures for biodiversity conservation cannot be evaluated and compared outside the context of institutional performance and relationships. The institutional framework for biodiversity incentives includes a variety of organizations operating on different spatial scales. The institutional actors with an impact on biodiversity include community groups, local and national governmental structures, NGOs, business enterprises and international organizations. But the positve influence of conservation-oriented organizations is often significantly outweighed by the negative influence of other sets of institutional actors who are largely unaware of biodiversity as a concept and not unduly concerned with its conservation. There are several options for improving the institutional framework for biodiversity incentives: (1) decentralization of resource management decision making to local levels; (2) engaging and reorienting government institutions; (3) establishing new national and international institutions; and (4) establishing functional linkages between key institutional actors. The role of local, national and international institutions in designing and implementing effective incentive measures for biodiversity conservation will be critical. But the dynamics within and between institutional actors influencing biodiversity conservation are complex, variable and insufficiently understood, somewhat like biodiversity itself.

Traditional approaches to conservation have led to the creation of magnificent parks and other protected areas. But site selection has often been ad hoc, top-down and opportunistic, rather than based on strategic biodiversity objectives, good data and socially inclusive conservation.

The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic extend to global biodiversity and its conservation. Although short-term beneficial or adverse impacts on biodiversity have been widely discussed, there is less attention to the likely political and economic responses to the crisis and their implications for conservation. Here we describe four possible alternative future policy responses: (1) restoration of the previous economy, (2) removal of obstacles to economic growth, (3) green recovery and (4) transformative economic reconstruction. Each alternative offers opportunities and risks for conservation. They differ in the agents they emphasize to mobilize change (e.g. markets or states) and in the extent to which they prioritize or downplay the protection of nature. We analyse the advantages and disadvantages of these four options from a conservation perspective. We argue that the choice of post-COVID-19 recovery strategy has huge significance for the future of biodiversity, and that conservationists of all persuasions must not shrink from engagement in the debates to come.

Agriculture, forestry and fisheries products, stable natural hydrological cycles, fertile soils, a balanced climate and numerous other vital ecosystem services depend upon the conservation of biological diversity. Food production relies on biodiversity for a variety of food plants, pollination, pest control, nutrient provision, genetic diversity, and disease prevention and control. Both medicinal plants and manufactured pharmaceuticals rely on biodiversity. Decreased biodiversity can lead to increased transmission of diseases to humans and increased healthcare costs. The outdoor tourism industry relies on biodiversity to create and maintain that which tourists come to see, as does the multi-billion dollar fishing and hunting industry. 350c69d7ab


Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...

Group Page: Groups_SingleGroup
bottom of page