DOCSLIB.ORG

Human Population Reduction Is Not a Quick Fix for Environmental Problems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Human Population Reduction Is Not a Quick Fix for Environmental Problems Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems Corey J. A. Bradshaw1 and Barry W. Brook The Environment Institute and School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia Edited by Paul R. Ehrlich, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved September 15, 2014 (received for review June 5, 2014) The inexorable demographic momentum of the global human of Earth’s human population because resource demands and population is rapidly eroding Earth’s life-support system. There are living space increase with population size, and proportional consequently more frequent calls to address environmental prob- ecological damage increases even when consumption patterns lems by advocating further reductions in human fertility. To exam- stabilize (22, 23); it is therefore essential that scenarios for future ine how quickly this could lead to a smaller human population, we human population dynamics are explored critically if we are to used scenario-based matrix modeling to project the global popula- plan for a healthy future society (24). tion to the year 2100. Assuming a continuation of current trends in There have been repeated calls for rapid action to reduce the mortality reduction, even a rapid transition to a worldwide one- world population humanely over the coming decades to centuries child policy leads to a population similar to today’s by 2100. Even (1, 3), with lay proponents complaining that sustainability a catastrophic mass mortality event of 2 billion deaths over a hypo- advocates ignore the “elephant in the room” of human over- st thetical 5-y window in the mid-21 century would still yield around population (25, 26). Amoral wars and global pandemics aside, 8.5 billion people by 2100. In the absence of catastrophe or large the only humane way to reduce the size of the human population fertility reductions (to fewer than two children per female world- is to encourage lower per capita fertility. This lowering has been — wide), the greatest threats to ecosystems as measured by regional happening in general for decades (27, 28), a result mainly of — projections within the 35 global Biodiversity Hotspots indicate higher levels of education and empowerment of women in the that Africa and South Asia will experience the greatest human pres- developed world, the rising affluence of developing nations, and ’ sures on future ecosystems. Humanity s large demographic momen- the one-child policy of China (29–32). Despite this change, en- tum means that there are no easy policy levers to change the size of vironmental conditions have worsened globally because of the the human population substantially over coming decades, short of overcompensating effects of rising affluence-linked population extreme and rapid reductions in female fertility; it will take centu- and consumption rates (3, 18). One of the problems is that there ries, and the long-term target remains unclear. However, some re- is still a large unmet need for more expansive and effective duction could be achieved by midcentury and lead to hundreds of family-planning assistance, which has been previously hindered millions fewer people to feed. More immediate results for sustain- by conservative religious and political opposition, premature ability would emerge from policies and technologies that reverse claims that rapid population growth has ended, and the reallo- rising consumption of natural resources. cation of resources toward other health issues (33). Effective contraception has also been delayed because of poor education demography | fertility | catastrophe | war | mortality regarding its availability, supply, cost, and safety, as well as op- position from family members (33). Notwithstanding, some ar- he size of the global human population is often considered gue that if we could facilitate the transition to lower fertility Tunsustainable in terms of its current and future impact on the Earth’s climate, its ability to distribute food production equita- Significance bly, population and species extinctions, the provision of adequate ecosystem services, and economic, sociological, and epidemio- ’ logical well-being (1–8). Others argue that technology, ingenuity, The planet s large, growing, and overconsuming human pop- and organization are stronger mediators of the environmental ulation, especially the increasing affluent component, is rapidly ’ impact of human activities (9–11). Regardless, Homo sapiens is eroding many of the Earth s natural ecosystems. However, ’ now numerically the dominant large organism on the planet. society s only real policy lever to reduce the human population According to the United Nations, the world human population humanely is to encourage lower per capita fertility. How long reached nearly 7.1 billion in 2013, with median projections of 9.6 might fertility reduction take to make a meaningful impact? billion (range: 8.3–11.0 billion) by 2050 and 10.9 billion (range: We examined various scenarios for global human population 6.8–16.6 billion) by 2100 (12), with more recent refinements change to the year 2100 by adjusting fertility and mortality placing the range at 9.6 to 12.3 billion by 2100 (13). So rapid has rates (both chronic and short-term interventions) to determine been the recent rise in the human population (i.e., from 1.6 the plausible range of outcomes. Even one-child policies im- posed worldwide and catastrophic mortality events would still billion in 1900), that roughly 14% of all of the human beings that – have ever existed are still alive today (14). likely result in 5 10 billion people by 2100. Because of this Worldwide, environmental conditions are threatened primar- demographic momentum, there are no easy ways to change the broad trends of human population size this century. ily because of human-driven processes in the form of land con- version (agriculture, logging, urbanization), direct exploitation Author contributions: C.J.A.B. and B.W.B. designed research; C.J.A.B. and B.W.B. per- (fishing, bushmeat), species introductions, pollution, climate formed research; B.W.B. contributed new reagents/analytic tools; C.J.A.B. analyzed data; change (emissions), and their synergistic interactions (15). Al- and C.J.A.B. and B.W.B. wrote the paper. though it is axiomatic that a smaller human population would The authors declare no conflict of interest. reduce most of these threatening processes (16), separating This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. consumption rates and population size per se is difficult (17) Data deposition: Data available from the Aekos Data Portal, www.aekos.org.au (dx.doi. because of their combined effects on the loss of biodiversity and org/10.4227/05/53869A9434A46). nonprovisioning natural capital (3, 18, 19), as well as the varia- 1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]. tion in consumption patterns among regions and socio-economic This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10. classes (20, 21). Sustainability requires an eventual stabilization 1073/pnas.1410465111/-/DCSupplemental. 16610–16615 | PNAS | November 18, 2014 | vol. 111 | no. 46 www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1410465111 Downloaded by guest on September 23, 2021 rates, most of the sustainability problems associated with the We accessed 2013 fertility data by 5-y age groups from the US Census large human population would be greatly alleviated (3, 34–36). Bureau International Database. We converted the births per 1,000 women Even in an ideal socio-political setting for lower birth-rate pol- into age-specific fertilities (mx) by dividing the 5-y classes equally among icies and the commitment to global-scale family planning, however, their constituent years and accounting for breeding female mortality within i each of the 5-y classes. All age-specific population size, mortality, and fer- several questions remain: ( ) How quickly could we achieve tility data we derived from these sources are available online at dx.doi.org/ a smaller human population by adjusting such sociological levers 10.4227/05/5386F14C65D34. (or via unexpected, large-scale stressors), and (ii)whereinthe world are human populations likely to do the most damage to their Leslie Matrix. We defined a prebreeding 100 (i) × 100 (j)element,Lesliematrix supporting environment over the coming century? To address (M) for females only, multiplying the subsequent projected population vector the first of these questions on population trajectories, we built by the overall sex ratio to estimate total population size at each time step. Fertilities (mx) occupied the first row of the matrix (ages 15–49), survival deterministic population models for humans, based on broad, – multiregion geographical data drawn from the World Health probabilities (1 Mx) were applied to the subdiagonal, and the final diagonal transition probability (Mi,j) represented survival of the 100+ age class. Complete Organization (WHO) and the United States Census Bureau. R code (43) for the scenario projections is provided in Datasets S1 and S2. Using a Leslie-matrix approach, we projected the 2013 world population through to the year 2100 with several adjustments to Global Scenarios. For each projection, we multiplied the Nx vector by M for 87 fertility, mortality, and age at first childbirth (primiparity) to in- yearly time steps (2013–2100, except for one fertility-reduction scenario that vestigate the relative importance of different vital rates (repre- was extended to 2300). All projections were deterministic. Scenario 1 was senting possible policy interventions or stressors) on the trajectory a business-as-usual (BAU) “control” projection, with all matrix elements kept “ ” and population size at the end of this century, and on the ratio of constant at 2013 values. Scenario 2a was a realistic projection with a linear the “dependent” component of the population (<15 and >65 y) decline in Mx, starting in 2013, to 50% of their initial values by 2100 (i.e., via improving diet, affluence, medicine, female empowerment, and so forth).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Rarest and Least Protected Forests in Biodiversity Hotspots
    Biodivers Conserv DOI 10.1007/s10531-012-0384-1 ORIGINAL PAPER The rarest and least protected forests in biodiversity hotspots Thomas W. Gillespie • Boris Lipkin • Lauren Sullivan • David R. Benowitz • Stephanie Pau • Gunnar Keppel Received: 20 March 2012 / Accepted: 4 October 2012 Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012 Abstract The goal of biodiversity hotspots is to identify regions around the world where conservation priorities should be focused. We undertake a geographic information system and remote sensing analysis to identify the rarest and least protected forests in biodiversity hotspots. World Wildlife Fund ecoregions with terrestrial forest were subset from 34 biodiversity hotspots and forest cover calculated from GlobCover data at a 300 m pixel resolution. There were 276 ecoregions in 32 biodiversity hotspots classified as containing terrestrial forests. When the first quartile of forest ecoregions was subset based on smallest extent of forest cover in protected areas, there were 69 rare forests identified within 20 biodiversity hotspots. Most rare forest ecoregions (45) occurred on islands or island archipelagos and 47 rare forest ecoregions contained less than 10 % forest cover in pro- tected areas. San Fe´lix-San Ambrosio Islands Temperate Forests, Tubuai Tropical Moist Forests, Maldives-Lakshadweep-Chagos Archipelago Tropical Moist Forests, and Yap Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10531-012-0384-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. T. W. Gillespie (&) Á B. Lipkin Á L. Sullivan Á D. R. Benowitz Department of Geography, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1524, USA e-mail: [email protected] B.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Ecological Forest Classification and Forest Protected Area Gap Analysis
    United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre Global Ecological Forest Classification and Forest Protected Area Gap Analysis Analyses and recommendations in view of the 10% target for forest protection under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2nd revised edition, January 2009 Global Ecological Forest Classification and Forest Protected Area Gap Analysis Analyses and recommendations in view of the 10% target for forest protection under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Report prepared by: United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) Network World Resources Institute (WRI) Institute of Forest and Environmental Policy (IFP) University of Freiburg Freiburg University Press 2nd revised edition, January 2009 The United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP- WCMC) is the biodiversity assessment and policy implementation arm of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the world's foremost intergovernmental environmental organization. The Centre has been in operation since 1989, combining scientific research with practical policy advice. UNEP-WCMC provides objective, scientifically rigorous products and services to help decision makers recognize the value of biodiversity and apply this knowledge to all that they do. Its core business is managing data about ecosystems and biodiversity, interpreting and analysing that data to provide assessments and policy analysis, and making the results
    [Show full text]
  • Land and Maritime Connectivity Project: Road Component Initial
    Land and Maritime Connectivity Project (RRP SOL 53421-001) Initial Environmental Examination Project No. 53421-001 Status: Draft Date: August 2020 Solomon Islands: Land and Maritime Connectivity Project – Multitranche Financing Facility Road Component Prepared by Ministry of Infrastructure Development This initial environmental examination is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of the ADB’s Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to any particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. Solomon Islands: Land and Maritime Connectivity Project Road Component – Initial Environmental Examination Table of Contents Abbreviations iv Executive Summary v 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background to the Project 1 1.2 Scope of the Environmental Assessment 5 2 Legal and Institutional Framework 6 2.1 Legal and Planning Framework 6 2.1.1 Country safeguard system 6 2.1.2 Other legislation supporting the CSS 7 2.1.3 Procedures for implementing the CSS 9 2.2 National Strategy and Plans 10 2.3 Safeguard Policy Statement 11 3 Description of the Subprojects 12 3.1 Location and Existing Conditions – SP-R1 12 3.1.1 Existing alignment 12 3.1.2 Identified issues and constraints 14 3.2 Location and Existing Conditions – SP-R5 15 3.2.1 Location
    [Show full text]
  • Species-Edition-Melanesian-Geo.Pdf
    Nature Melanesian www.melanesiangeo.com Geo Tranquility 6 14 18 24 34 66 72 74 82 6 Herping the final frontier 42 Seahabitats and dugongs in the Lau Lagoon 10 Community-based response to protecting biodiversity in East 46 Herping the sunset islands Kwaio, Solomon Islands 50 Freshwater secrets Ocean 14 Leatherback turtle community monitoring 54 Freshwater hidden treasures 18 Monkey-faced bats and flying foxes 58 Choiseul Island: A biogeographic in the Western Solomon Islands stepping-stone for reptiles and amphibians of the Solomon Islands 22 The diversity and resilience of flying foxes to logging 64 Conservation Development 24 Feasibility studies for conserving 66 Chasing clouds Santa Cruz Ground-dove 72 Tetepare’s turtle rodeo and their 26 Network Building: Building a conservation effort network to meet local and national development aspirations in 74 Secrets of Tetepare Culture Western Province 76 Understanding plant & kastom 28 Local rangers undergo legal knowledge on Tetepare training 78 Grassroots approach to Marine 30 Propagation techniques for Tubi Management 34 Phantoms of the forest 82 Conservation in Solomon Islands: acts without actions 38 Choiseul Island: Protecting Mt Cover page The newly discovered Vangunu Maetambe to Kolombangara River Island endemic rat, Uromys vika. Image watershed credit: Velizar Simeonovski, Field Museum. wildernesssolomons.com WWW.MELANESIANGEO.COM | 3 Melanesian EDITORS NOTE Geo PRODUCTION TEAM Government Of Founder/Editor: Patrick Pikacha of the priority species listed in the Critical Ecosystem [email protected] Solomon Islands Hails Partnership Fund’s investment strategy for the East Assistant editor: Tamara Osborne Melanesian Islands. [email protected] Barana Community The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) Contributing editor: David Boseto [email protected] is designed to safeguard Earth’s most biologically rich Prepress layout: Patrick Pikacha Nature Park Initiative and threatened regions, known as biodiversity hotspots.
    [Show full text]
  • A Rapid Biodiversity Survey of Papua New Guinea’S Manus and Mussau Islands
    A Rapid Biodiversity Survey of Papua New Guinea’s Manus and Mussau Islands edited by Nathan Whitmore Published by: Wildlife Conservation Society Papua New Guinea Program PO BOX 277, Goroka, Eastern Highlands Province PAPUA NEW GUINEA Tel: +675-532-3494 www.wcs.org Editor: Nathan Whitmore. Authors: Ken P. Aplin, Arison Arihafa, Kyle N. Armstrong, Richard Cuthbert, Chris J. Müller, Junior Novera, Stephen J. Richards, William Tamarua, Günther Theischinger, Fanie Venter, and Nathan Whitmore. The Wildlife Conservation Society is a private, not-for-profit organisation exempt from federal income tax under section 501c(3) of the Inland Revenue Code. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the contributors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Wildlife Conservation Society, the Criticial Ecosystems Partnership Fund, nor the Papua New Guinean Department of Environment or Conservation. Suggested citation: Whitmore N. (editor) 2015. A rapid biodiversity survey of Papua New Guinea’s Manus and Mussau Islands. Wildlife Conservation Society Papua New Guinea Program. Goroka, PNG. ISBN: 978-0-9943203-1-5 Front cover Image: Fanie Venter: cliffs of Mussau. ©2015 Wildlife Conservation Society A rapid biodiversity survey of Papua New Guinea’s Manus and Mussau Islands. Edited by Nathan Whitmore Table of Contents Participants i Acknowledgements iii Organisational profiles iv Letter of support v Foreword vi Executive summary vii Introduction 1 Chapters 1: Plants of Mussau Island 4 2: Butterflies of Mussau Island (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera)
    [Show full text]
  • Safeguard: Process Framework For
    Process Framework for Involuntary Restrictions May 29, 2018 CEPF Grant Proposal 103961 J. Albert C. Uy, University of Miami Establishing a Protected Area in East Makira Key Biodiversity Area to Conserve Biodiversity, the Solomon Islands East Makira, Solomon Islands Grant Summary 1. Grantee organization: University of Miami 2. Grant title: Establishing a Protected Area in East Makira Key Biodiversity Area to Conserve Biodiversity, the Solomon Islands 3. Grant number: 103961 4. Proposed grant amount (US dollars): US$84,476.00 5. Proposed dates of grant: June 1, 2018 to May 31, 2020 6. Countries or territories where project will be undertaken: Solomon Islands 7. Date of preparation of this document: May 29, 2018 The Process Framework will describe the project and how restrictions of access to natural resources and measures to assist affected communities. Affected communities should have the opportunity to participate in the drafting of the Process Framework. Typically, the Applicant will prepare a draft Framework that will then be shared and discussed with local communities and other relevant stakeholders. Based on the consultations, a final Framework will be prepared. CEPF may provide guidance on development of the Framework and will review and approve the final Framework prior to approving the final project proposal application. The Process Framework should include the following elements: A. Project background Makira Island, which is included in the East Melanesian Islands Biodiversity Hotspot and the Global 200 Ecoregions, has one of the highest rates of species endemism in the entire Solomon Islands. Unfortunately, this rich endemism is under constant threat from clear-cut logging.
    [Show full text]
  • Cepf | Through 30 June 2018 Impact Report
    CEPF | THROUGH 30 JUNE 2018 IMPACT REPORT GUINEAN FORESTS OF WEST AFRICA ECOSYSTEM PROFILE SUMMARY 1 IntroductionIntroductionIntroduction GOAL Empowering locally led conservation of biodiversity hotspots— Introduction some of the world’s most biologically rich yet threatened 2000 to 30 June 2018 ecosystems. • Donor partnership: Since 2000, CEPF has been bringing CEPF’S together global and regional donors to conserve biodiversity, 24 APPROACH strengthen civil society and support sustainable development. Hotspot Strategies Implemented • Focused investment: Based on an assessment of opportunities and threats, CEPF donor partners choose which biodiversity hotspots to invest in as funding becomes available. • Participatory priority-setting: Grant making is guided by ecosystem profiles, analyses of the biodiversity and 2,305 socio-economic conditions in each hotspot that are Grantees Supported produced by, and in consultation with, local stakeholders. The result is a regional conservation strategy tailored to the most urgent needs, using practical solutions. • Local management: CEPF partners with a regional implementation team in the hotspot to help shepherd the investment and build local conservation leadership. US$232M Grants Committed • Grants to civil society: Civil society entities—including nongovernmental organizations, communities, indigenous peoples groups, universities and small businesses—apply for grants that are awarded on a competitive basis for projects that contribute to CEPF’s conservation strategy. A Awoman womanA woman looks looks outlooks out at atouta foresta atforest a foreston on Flores Flores on Flores Island, Island, Island, Indonesia, Indonesia, Indonesia, in inthe the inWallacea Wallaceathe Wallacea Biodiversity Biodiversity Biodiversity Hotspot. Hotspot. Hotspot.US$371M © ©Conservation Conservation © Conservation A woman looks out at a forest on Flores Island, Indonesia, in the Wallacea Biodiversity Hotspot.
    [Show full text]
  • (Gehyra: Gekkonidae: Reptilia) from the East Melanesian Islands
    Zootaxa 4208 (1): 061–076 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2016 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4208.1.3 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:CD5A5038-5FEF-4284-9DB1-F617BEC19551 A new biogeographically disjunct giant gecko (Gehyra: Gekkonidae: Reptilia) from the East Melanesian Islands PAUL M. OLIVER1,6, JONATHAN R. CLEGG2,3, ROBERT N. FISHER4, STEPHEN J. RICHARDS5, PETER N. TAYLOR2,3 & MERLIJN M. T. JOCQUE2,3 1Division of Evolution, Ecology and Genetics, Research School of Biology, and Centre for Biodiversity Analysis, The Australian National University, Building 116, Daley Road, Acton, ACT, 0200, Australia 2Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecology (ATECO), Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences (RBINS), Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels, Belgium 3Biodiversity Inventory for Conservation (BINCO) vzw, Walmersumstraat 44, 3380 Glabbeek, Belgium 4U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, San Diego Field Station, 4165 Spruance Road Suite 200, San Diego, California 92101-0812, USA 5South Australian Museum, Adelaide, South Australia 5000, Australia 6Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract The East Melanesian Islands have been a focal area for research into island biogeography and community ecology. How- ever, previously undescribed and biogeographically significant new species endemic to this region continue to be discov- ered. Here we describe a phylogenetically distinct (~20% divergence at the mitochondrial ND2 gene) and biogeographically disjunct new species of gecko in the genus Gehyra, from the Admiralty and St Matthias Islands. Gehyra rohan sp. nov. can be distinguished from all congeners by the combination of its very large size, ring of bright orange scales around the eye, moderate degree of lateral folding on the limbs and body, and aspects of head, body and tail scala- tion.
    [Show full text]
  • Why the Pacific Matters
    Published on June 5, 2018 Off the coast of Majuro, Marshall Islands (Credit: Cameron Diver) Why the Pacific matters By Cameron Diver I often think the Pacific region is, unjustly, treated as the poor cousin of international development. The Pacific is miles away from a major centre of international influence, and is a gigantic ocean space with very little land and, globally speaking, very few people. The attention of world media and, more often than not, the international community only focuses briefly on the Pacific when there is either a major natural disaster or an exceptional sporting event, before the gaze turns away once more. In addition, the Pacific gets the lowest regional share of total net overseas development assistance, lagging far behind Africa, Asia, America and Europe. So why then, you might ask, does the Pacific matter? The Pacific matters because the Pacific Ocean is the planet’s blue lung and, according to some models, absorbs around 13% of the annual CO2 emissions from Link: https://devpolicy.org/why-the-pacific-matters-20180605/ Page 1 of 4 Date downloaded: September 25, 2021 Published on June 5, 2018 fossil fuels and industry every year. It matters because increasing plastic pollution, ocean acidification, illegal overfishing, inadequate protection and other unsustainable practices are threatening the world’s largest ocean and its resources. In the Pacific, the calls to “save our oceans” and “clean our seas” are not simply catchphrases; they are an urgent necessity requiring global commitment and action. It matters because the Pacific contributes to worldwide food security,with over 2.5 million tonnes of tuna caught in Pacific waters each year.
    [Show full text]
  • East Melanesian Islands Ecosystem Profile Summary About CEPF
    East Melanesian Islands Ecosystem Profile Summary About CEPF Established in 2000, the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is a global leader in enabling civil society to participate in and influence the conservation of some of the world’s most critical ecosystems. CEPF is a joint initiative of l’Agence Française de Développement (AFD), Conservation International, the European Union, the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the Government of Japan, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the World Bank. CEPF is unique among funding mechanisms in that it focuses on high-priority biological areas rather than political boundaries and examines conservation threats on a landscape scale. From this perspective, CEPF seeks to identify and support a regional, rather than a national, approach to achieving conservation outcomes and engages a wide range of public and private institutions to address conservation needs through coordinated regional efforts. Cover photo left to right: Biodiversity reserves in the Solomon Islands boast a stunning variety of endemic plants. © AMNH/Michael Esbach Solomon Islands. © Tom Gruber The Hotspot The East Melanesian Islands, which include the island nations of Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands plus the islands region of Papua New Guinea (PNG), qualify as a hotspot due to their high levels of plant and animal endemism and accelerating levels of habitat loss. The chief causes include widespread commercial logging and mining, expansion of subsistence and plantation agriculture, population increase and the impacts of climate change and variability. As well as being a biodiversity hotspot, the East Melanesian Islands also hold exceptional cultural and linguistic diversity. Vanuatu, for example, has 108 living languages: more per unit area than any other country.
    [Show full text]
  • Call for Letters of Inquiry East Melanesian Islands Biodiversity Hotspot Large and Small Grants BACKGROUND
    Call for Letters of Inquiry East Melanesian Islands Biodiversity Hotspot Large and Small Grants Eligible Countries: Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, the islands region of Papua New Guinea Opening Date: 11 February 2019 Closing Date: 11 April 2019, 6 p.m. in Washington, D.C. (Eastern Time) The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), in its role as the CEPF Regional Implementation Team (RIT) for the East Melanesian Islands Biodiversity Hotspot, are accepting letters of inquiry (LOI) from civil society organizations for large- and small-grant projects. BACKGROUND CEPF is designed to safeguard Earth’s biologically richest yet threatened terrestrial regions, known as biodiversity hotspots. CEPF is a joint initiative of l’Agence Française de Développement, Conservation International, the European Union, the Global Environment Facility, the Government of Japan and the World Bank. A fundamental goal is to ensure civil society plays a critical role in achieving biodiversity conservation outcomes. CEPF’s niche for investment in the East Melanesian Islands was formulated through a participatory process that engaged civil society, donor and governmental stakeholders throughout the region. The results of this process and the eight-year (2013–2021) strategy that CEPF has identified for supporting biodiversity conservation in the region are outlined in the ecosystem profile. Five strategic directions were identified, covering 20 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) in the three countries that are eligible for CEPF support, and addressing threats to 48 priority species. The CEPF investment strategy supports biodiversity conservation in ways that deliver significant, meaningful benefits to local communities, while making a sustained contribution to the development of local, national and regional capacity for conservation.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2018 Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund CEPF’S GOAL
    Annual Report 2018 Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund CEPF’S GOAL Protect biodiversity by strengthening civil society in the world’s biodiversity hotspots—places with high levels of biological diversity that are under extreme threat. CEPF’S APPROACH • Donor partnership: Since 2000, CEPF has been bringing together global • Grants to civil society: Civil society entities—including nongovernmental and regional donors to conserve biodiversity, strengthen civil society and organizations, communities, indigenous peoples groups, universities and support sustainable development. small businesses—apply for grants that are awarded on a competitive basis for projects that contribute to CEPF’s conservation strategy. • Focused investment: On the basis of an assessment of opportunities and threats, CEPF donor partners choose which biodiversity hotspots to • Enduring conservation: Projects funded by CEPF add up to a portfolio invest in as funding becomes available. of complementary conservation actions addressing critical priorities while also building local conservation communities that will continue to • Participatory priority-setting: Grant making is guided by ecosystem lead protection of the hotspots after CEPF funding is completed. profiles—analyses of the biodiversity and socio-economic conditions in each hotspot that are produced by, and in consultation with, local • Achieving global goals: The results achieved by CEPF grantees stakeholders. The result is a regional conservation strategy tailored to complement governments’ efforts to meet targets related to the U.N.’s the most urgent needs, using practical solutions. Convention on Biological Diversity (the Aichi Targets), Framework Convention on Climate Change, and Sustainable Development Goals. • Local management: CEPF partners with a regional implementation team in the hotspot to help shepherd the investment and build local conservation leadership.
    [Show full text]