DOCSLIB.ORG

Understanding the Concept of Carrying Capacity and Its Relevance to Urban and Regional Planning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Understanding the Concept of Carrying Capacity and Its Relevance to Urban and Regional Planning Open Access Review Article J Environ Stud April 2017 Vol.:3, Issue:1 © All rights are reserved by Taiwo, et al.. Journal of Understanding the Concept Environmental of Carrying Capacity and its Studies Famutimi John Taiwo1* and Oni Oluwasola Feyisara2 Relevance to Urban and Regional 1 Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Environmental Studies, Rufus Giwa Polytechnic, Owo, Ondo State, Nigeria Planning 2Department of Architecture, Faculty of Environmental Studies, Rufus Giwa Polytechnic, Owo, Ondo State, Nigeria Keywords: Carrying capacity; Overshoot; Sustainable environment; *Address for Correspondence Urbanization Famutimi John Taiwo, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Environmental Studies, Rufus Giwa Polytechnic, Owo, Ondo Abstract State, Nigeria, Tel: +2348038422059; E-mail: [email protected] The increasing urbanization and the rapidly accumulating Submission: 31 October, 2016 population have caused tremendous changes on the earth’s Accepted: 31 March, 2017 landscape which do not only trigger off improvement in civilization Published: 07 April, 2017 and modernization, but have also progressed global challenges such as flooding, desertification, global warming, loss of bio-diversity, Copyright: © 2017 Taiwo FJ. This is an open access article distributed housing crises and hunger among others: which have not only under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits remained a source of concern but also a herculean task for planners unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided and other professionals in the built environment, to contend with the original work is properly cited. in the 21st century. These challenges, however, denote that an overshoot of the earth’s carrying capacity has been reached [1]. And if this issue is left unattended to there is the likelihood that, far environmental problems we are experiencing today such as greater calamities may be engendered to make the world both overpopulation, rapid urbanization, green house effect and global inhabitable and unsustainable in the years to come. If the focus of planning is to provide a desired array of ‘quality of life’ to people warming, biodiversity loss, desertification, depletion of ozone layer, now and without jeopardizing that of future generations, through acid rain, oil spills, dumping of hazardous waste and a host of others physical and social designs of the human environment, it is therefore are simply, an expression of the earth’s ‘overshoot’ or feedback arising imperative to examine not only what is engineeringly, economically, from the overloading of the earth’s support [1]. The realization of these socially, politically and legally acceptable, but also the degree to challenges has culminated in growing concerns among world leaders, which physical and functional plans are tied to ecological systems for resource supplies and for residuals assimilation. The paper attempts to policy makers and professionals in the built environment, on the document the origin of carrying capacity as a concept, reviewing its trend or type of best practices to adopt to make the earth a sustainable dimensions as it relates to the understanding of urban and regional place to live in. Achieving this requires a critical understanding of the planning as a field of human endeavour. It argues that, recognizing sustainable limit or cut-off point the earth can safely support without and establishing the limits or capacities of urban activity system along the lines of the carrying capacities provides decision makers with a any jeopardy for its current and future inhabitants. workable approach to assessing the natural and human viability of In their contributions to the sustainable development debate, urban and regional planning proposals. The paper finally posits that, there is the need for all the stakeholders, urban analysts, professionals Ewing et al. assert that we cannot make meaningful decisions about in the built environment who in their operations, are to inbuilt the where we need to go before we know where we stand [5]. This finiteness of the earth’s capital assets into the existing and potential suggests that, knowing the limit to which development is feasible goals and aspirations of man in the 21st century. within the context of the carrying capacity of our natural ecosystems becomes imperative so as to be able to withstand the changes arising Introduction from human actions. Ewing et al. argument appears to be in tandem with those of the World Development Report (2003) which stipulates The advent of globalization and the quest for development have that sustainable development in our planet earth and its entire fabric triggered off impressive economic progress, creating materials and requires an understanding of the limit of growth [5]. In view of this, luxury of life. At the same time, this progress and its associated therefore, the paper focuses on carrying capacity as an issue that benefits have imposed a tremendous cost to the global environment. needs to be critically examined if the present rising wave of humanity In spite of the serious challenges and threats introduced into our is going to be supported indefinitely by the earth’s dwindling common global environment in return, it is certain; according to IIT resources. In doing this, the paper is sectioned into five phases. (2012) that development around the world is taking place at a faster Following the introductory section is the meaning and definition rate [2]. As Onibokun pointed out cities will continue to grow while of the concept of carrying capacity and its evolution/historical and challenges will continue to become more complex as development conceptual background. Next to this is the consideration of the continues to take place in the different spheres of the world [3]. various dimensions of concept, while the last section addresses the Therefore, the actions we take now will determine whether or not relevance and applicability of the concept to the practice of Urban the current course of development will be sustainable for the future, and Regional Planning in Nigeria. or will merely produce deleterious repercussions that are capable of destroying us. Meaning and Definitions of Carrying Capacity Consequently, recent data suggests that many of the global The term “carrying capacity” can simply be defined as the Citation: Taiwo FJ, Feyisara OO. Understanding the Concept of Carrying Capacity and its Relevance to Urban and Regional Planning. J Environ Stud. 2017;3(1): 5. Citation: Taiwo FJ, Feyisara OO. Understanding the Concept of Carrying Capacity and its Relevance to Urban and Regional Planning. J Environ Stud. 2017;3(1): 5. ISSN: 2471-4879 maximum population that can be supported or sustained by an 5) The species in-built resilience for systematic or sporadic ecosystem over time [6,7]. Carrying capacity can equally mean “the perturbations or threats to the environment. maximum pressure or load that a system can conveniently withstand However, if the carrying capacity of a population’s species is before breaking down”. A system breaks down when it can no longer exceeded, the following repercussions may occur: cope with the pressure from the loads it is carrying. In like manner, when the carrying capacity of the earth as a system can no longer 1. The species or the organisms may become locally extinct; sustain the pressure of population explosion, the unacceptable 2. The environment may be permanently altered or destroyed; impacts occur in the form of deteriorating or negative effects. In other words, carrying capacity of an area refers to an extreme limit. 3. In case of too many animals, overgrazing may occur, loss This limit defines the population carrying capacity of the area. If this of vegetation cover, irreversible changes to soil quality and limit is crossed then the nature will react by imposing pressure to productivity, which in turn leads to a reduced carrying resist the abrupt growth and development of the people resulting capacity for the livestock of the area concerned. into equilibrium. These pressures can be in form of floods, droughts, Humans today extract and use around 50% more natural famines, landslides, etc. resources than only 30 years ago [12]. For example, International Carrying capacity has been conceptualized differently among Energy (2012) equally observed that the world energy-consumption various professions. For instance, in the construction industry, the patterns escalated from 4,672 million tonnes of energy in 1973 to term is used to refer to the ability of the foundations, materials or 8,677 million tonnes of energy in 2010. This increasing resource structures to accommodate a given load (load-bearing capacity), in extraction does not just lead to environmental problems, but it is terms of either weight or volume and number of cars a freeway or often linked to social problems such as human rights violation and a bridge can carry smoothly [8]. In international shipping activities, poor working conditions. These negative environmental and social it may be defined by the quantity of cargo an ocean-going freighter impacts are mostly felt in Africa, Latin America and Asian countries or steam boat can carry [9,10]; and from the perspective of tourism with low environmental and social standards [13]. Given current management, carrying capacity denotes the number of people who growth, world extraction of natural resources could increase to 100 can use a given area without an acceptable alteration
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Projections of Global Carrying Capacity - Graeme Hugo
    THE ROLE OF FOOD, AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHERIES IN HUMAN NUTRITION – Vol. III - Projections of Global Carrying Capacity - Graeme Hugo PROJECTIONS OF GLOBAL CARRYING CAPACITY Graeme Hugo Professor of Geography, University of Adelaide, Australia Keywords: Carrying capacity, optimum population, population pressure, renewable resources, resource exploitation, economic development, fossil fuels, hunter-gatherers, ecological sustainability, cereal grains, consumption Contents 1. Introduction 2. The Reality of Projected Population Growth 3. Responses to Population Pressure on Resources 4. Optimum Populations 5. Food Production Outlook 6. Projections of Global Carrying Capacity 7. Conclusion Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary The term carrying capacity is applied largely to animal populations as the maximum number of individuals in a particular species that can be indefinitely supported by the resources in a particular area. In animal contexts the carrying capacity is determined by the amount of food available, the number of predators, and the rate at which the environment can replace the resources that are used by the population. In applying this concept to humans there are two differences. First, human beings have the capacity to innovate and to use technology and to pass innovations on to future generations, so they have the capacity to redefine upward the limits imposed by carrying capacity. Second, human beings need and use a wider range of resources than food and water in the environment. Hence, human carrying capacity is a function of the resources in an area, the consumption level of those resources, and the technology used in exploitingUNESCO them. Therefore, there is –a grEOLSSeat deal of difficulty experienced in operationalizing or measuring human carrying capacity globally or regionally.
    [Show full text]
  • Carrying Capacity
    CarryingCapacity_Sayre.indd Page 54 12/22/11 7:31 PM user-f494 /203/BER00002/Enc82404_disk1of1/933782404/Enc82404_pagefiles Carrying Capacity Carrying capacity has been used to assess the limits of into a single defi nition probably would be “the maximum a wide variety of things, environments, and systems to or optimal amount of a substance or organism (X ) that convey or sustain other things, organisms, or popula- can or should be conveyed or supported by some encom- tions. Four major types of carrying capacity can be dis- passing thing or environment (Y ).” But the extraordinary tinguished; all but one have proved empirically and breadth of the concept so defi ned renders it extremely theoretically fl awed because the embedded assump- vague. As the repetitive use of the word or suggests, car- tions of carrying capacity limit its usefulness to rying capacity can be applied to almost any relationship, bounded, relatively small-scale systems with high at almost any scale; it can be a maximum or an optimum, degrees of human control. a normative or a positive concept, inductively or deduc- tively derived. Better, then, to examine its historical ori- gins and various uses, which can be organized into four he concept of carrying capacity predates and in many principal types: (1) shipping and engineering, beginning T ways prefi gures the concept of sustainability. It has in the 1840s; (2) livestock and game management, begin- been used in a wide variety of disciplines and applica- ning in the 1870s; (3) population biology, beginning in tions, although it is now most strongly associated with the 1950s; and (4) debates about human population and issues of global human population.
    [Show full text]
  • Stochastic Predation Exposes Prey to Predator Pits and Local Extinction
    130 300–309 OIKOS Research Stochastic predation exposes prey to predator pits and local extinction T. J. Clark, Jon S. Horne, Mark Hebblewhite and Angela D. Luis T. J. Clark (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0115-3482) ✉ ([email protected]), M. Hebblewhite (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5382-1361) and A. D. Luis, Wildlife Biology Program, Dept of Ecosystem and Conservation Sciences, W. A. Franke College of Forestry and Conservation, Univ. of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA. – J. S. Horne, Idaho Dept of Fish and Game, Lewiston, ID, USA. Oikos Understanding how predators affect prey populations is a fundamental goal for ecolo- 130: 300–309, 2021 gists and wildlife managers. A well-known example of regulation by predators is the doi: 10.1111/oik.07381 predator pit, where two alternative stable states exist and prey can be held at a low density equilibrium by predation if they are unable to pass the threshold needed to Subject Editor: James D. Roth attain a high density equilibrium. While empirical evidence for predator pits exists, Editor-in-Chief: Dries Bonte deterministic models of predator–prey dynamics with realistic parameters suggest they Accepted 6 November 2020 should not occur in these systems. Because stochasticity can fundamentally change the dynamics of deterministic models, we investigated if incorporating stochastic- ity in predation rates would change the dynamics of deterministic models and allow predator pits to emerge. Based on realistic parameters from an elk–wolf system, we found predator pits were predicted only when stochasticity was included in the model. Predator pits emerged in systems with highly stochastic predation and high carrying capacities, but as carrying capacity decreased, low density equilibria with a high likeli- hood of extinction became more prevalent.
    [Show full text]
  • Carrying Capacity a Discussion Paper for the Year of RIO+20
    UNEP Global Environmental Alert Service (GEAS) Taking the pulse of the planet; connecting science with policy Website: www.unep.org/geas E-mail: [email protected] June 2012 Home Subscribe Archive Contact “Earthrise” taken on 24 December 1968 by Apollo astronauts. NASA Thematic Focus: Environmental Governance, Resource Efficiency One Planet, How Many People? A Review of Earth’s Carrying Capacity A discussion paper for the year of RIO+20 We travel together, passengers on a little The size of Earth is enormous from the perspective spaceship, dependent on its vulnerable reserves of a single individual. Standing at the edge of an ocean of air and soil; all committed, for our safety, to its or the top of a mountain, looking across the vast security and peace; preserved from annihilation expanse of Earth’s water, forests, grasslands, lakes or only by the care, the work and the love we give our deserts, it is hard to conceive of limits to the planet’s fragile craft. We cannot maintain it half fortunate, natural resources. But we are not a single person; we half miserable, half confident, half despairing, half are now seven billion people and we are adding one slave — to the ancient enemies of man — half free million more people roughly every 4.8 days (2). Before in a liberation of resources undreamed of until this 1950 no one on Earth had lived through a doubling day. No craft, no crew can travel safely with such of the human population but now some people have vast contradictions. On their resolution depends experienced a tripling in their lifetime (3).
    [Show full text]
  • Overpopulation Is Not the Problem - Nytimes.Com Page 1 of 3
    Overpopulation Is Not the Problem - NYTimes.com Page 1 of 3 September 13, 2013 Overpopulation Is Not the Problem By ERLE C. ELLIS BALTIMORE — MANY scientists believe that by transforming the earth’s natural landscapes, we are undermining the very life support systems that sustain us. Like bacteria in a petri dish, our exploding numbers are reaching the limits of a finite planet, with dire consequences. Disaster looms as humans exceed the earth’s natural carrying capacity. Clearly, this could not be sustainable. This is nonsense. Even today, I hear some of my scientific colleagues repeat these and similar claims — often unchallenged. And once, I too believed them. Yet these claims demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of the ecology of human systems. The conditions that sustain humanity are not natural and never have been. Since prehistory, human populations have used technologies and engineered ecosystems to sustain populations well beyond the capabilities of unaltered “natural” ecosystems. The evidence from archaeology is clear. Our predecessors in the genus Homo used social hunting strategies and tools of stone and fire to extract more sustenance from landscapes than would otherwise be possible. And, of course, Homo sapiens went much further, learning over generations, once their preferred big game became rare or extinct, to make use of a far broader spectrum of species. They did this by extracting more nutrients from these species by cooking and grinding them, by propagating the most useful species and by burning woodlands to enhance hunting and foraging success. Even before the last ice age had ended, thousands of years before agriculture, hunter- gatherer societies were well established across the earth and depended increasingly on sophisticated technological strategies to sustain growing populations in landscapes long ago transformed by their ancestors.
    [Show full text]
  • Answers to Exercise 29 Harvest Models
    Answers to Exercise 29 Harvest Models Fixed-Quota versus Fixed-Effort: First Questions QUESTIONS 1. What are the effects of different values of R and K on catches and population sizes in the two harvest models? 2. What are the effects of different values of Q on catches and population size in the population harvested under a fixed quota scheme? 3. What are the effects of different values of E on catches and population size in the population harvested under a fixed quota scheme? 4. How does the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) relate to R and/or K? 5. Is there any difference between fixed-quota and fixed-effort harvesting in terms of risk of driving the harvested population to extinction? ANSWERS 1. Change R by entering different values into cell B6. Change K by entering different values into cell B7. Your changes will be automatically echoed in the models. After each change, examine your spreadsheet, your graph of population size and harvest, and your graphs of recruitment curve and quota or effort line. Try changing K from 2000 to 4000, leaving R at 0.50. You should see that the catch remains unchanged at 250 individuals per time period in the fixed quota scheme. This is hardly surprising, because that's the nature of a fixed quota—it does not change. The catch in the fixed effort scheme starts at 1000 and declines to an equilibrium of 500, which is twice the catch in the fixed effort harvest with the original carrying capacity of 2000. Your graph of the recruitment curve and fixed quota now shows the quota line (horizontal line) crossing the recruitment curve at two points, in contrast to just touching the recruitment curve at its peak with the original value of K.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatially Explicit Carrying Capacity Estimates to Inform Species Specific T Recovery Objectives: Grizzly Bear (Ursus Arctos) Recovery in the North Cascades ⁎ Andrea L
    Biological Conservation 222 (2018) 21–32 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Spatially explicit carrying capacity estimates to inform species specific T recovery objectives: Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) recovery in the North Cascades ⁎ Andrea L. Lyonsa, , William L. Gainesa, Peter H. Singletonb, Wayne F. Kaswormc, Michael F. Proctord, James Begleya a WA Conservation Science Institute, PO Box 494, Cashmere, WA 98815, USA b US Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 1133 N Western Avenue, Wenatchee, WA, 98801, USA c US Fish and Wildlife Service, 385 Fish Hatchery Rd, Libby, MT, 59923, USA d BirchdaleEcologicalLtd, PO Box 606, Kaslo, BC, Canada V0G 1M0 ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: The worldwide decline of large carnivores is concerning, particularly given the important roles they play in Carrying capacity shaping ecosystems and conserving biodiversity. Estimating the capacity of an ecosystem to support a large Individual-based population modeling carnivore population is essential for establishing reasonable and quantifiable recovery goals, determining how Habitat selection population recovery may rely on connectivity, and determining the feasibility of investing limited public re- Carnivore sources toward recovery. We present a case study that synthesized advances in habitat selection and spatially- Grizzly bear explicit individual-based population modeling, while integrating habitat data, human activities, demographic parameters and complex life histories to estimate grizzly bear carrying capacity in the North Cascades Ecosystem in Washington. Because access management plays such a critical role in wildlife conservation, we also quantified road influence on carrying capacity. Carrying capacity estimatesranged from 83 to 402 female grizzly bears. As expected, larger home ranges resulted in smaller populations and roads decreased habitat effectiveness by over 30%.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Pressure and Land Degradation: the Case of Ethiopia
    Poverty, Resource Scarcity and Incentives for Soil and Water Conservation: Analysis of Interactions with a Bio-economic Model Bekele Shiferaw1 International Crops Research Institute for the Semiarid Tropics (ICRISAT) Patancheru 502 324, Andhara Pradesh, India E-mail: [email protected] And Stein Holden Department of Economics and Social Sciences Agricultural University of Norway Contributed paper selected for presentation at the 25th International Conference of Agricultural Economists, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa Copyright 2003 by Bekele Shiferaw and Stein Holden. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. 1 Corresponding author. 1 Poverty, Resource Scarcity and Incentives for Soil and Water Conservation: Analysis of Interactions with a Bio-economic Model Abstract The paper examines the interlinkages between population pressure and poverty, possible impacts on household welfare and land management, and the consequent pathways of development in a low potential rural economy. A dynamic non-separable bio-economic model, calibrated using data from the Ethiopian highlands, is used to trace key relationships between population pressure, poverty and soil fertility management in smallholder agriculture characterized by high levels of soil degradation. Farm households maximize their discounted utility over the planning horizon. Land, labor and credit markets are imperfect. Hence, production, consumption and investment decisions are jointly determined in each period. The level of soil degradation is endogenous and has feedback effects on the stock and quality of the resource base. This may in turn influence land management choices. Under high population pressure, land becomes dearer relative to labor.
    [Show full text]
  • Carrying Capacity Literature Reviews
    Lake Sunapee Watershed Project Portfolio – Carrying Capacity Literature Reviews CARRYING CAPACITY LITERATURE REVIEWS When measured accurately, carrying capacity can be very helpful in environmental management practices. The purpose of this assignment was to gain further knowledge of carrying capacity to improve current methodologies. Each student was assigned to research and prepare a literature review on a different aspect of carrying capacity. The topics were defined as follows: 1. How does one know what it is?...................................................................2 2. How is it determined?..................................................................................5 3. How is it managed?......................................................................................8 4. How are biology/ecology/habitat linked?...................................................11 5. What are human demands?.........................................................................13 6. Population dynamics, how do variables influence each other?...................17 7. How does carrying capacity relate to sprawl, density and development?...20 8. Water and trash…………………………………………………………....22 9. Human population growth?..........................................................................25 The result of this research is not an invention of the most effective methodology; rather a clearer understanding of the many variables involved and the inconsistencies between methodologies. The main theme found throughout the literature of carrying
    [Show full text]
  • Pressure Points: Environmental Degradation, Migration and Conflict
    Pressure Points: Environmental Degradation, Migration and Conflict Astri Suhrke Chr. Michelsen Institute he environmental refugee has appeared in the literature on environment Tand security, and with it the refugee as both a cause and victim of conflict. Some fear environmental degradation will produce "waves of environmental refugees that spill across borders with destabilizing effects" on both domestic order and international stability (Homer-Dixon 1991:77). Others focus on Africa, as the presumably most vulnerable area, arguing that deepening desertification already has displaced millions of people and generated acute as well as long-term structural conflict (Hjort af Omas and Salih 1989, Bennett 1991). This paper attempts to systematize the links between environmental degradation, migration and social conflict that are present in the literature. The starting point is one of skepticism towards the catastrophic notion that environmental degradation will generate massive population displacement which in turn will ignite social conflict. Conflict is obviously not a necessary consequence of migration; nor is it clear that environmental degradation by itself is a magor cause of population movements. To determine under what conditions the sequence of degradation-displacement-conflict develops, we must address two central questions: f~st,is environmental degradation associated with particular migration patterns, i.e., are there environmentally driven migrations? And, second, when do such migrations result in conflict? Common forms of environmental degradation include desertifica- tion, land degradation, rising sea levels induced by global warming, and deforestation with its many consequences. Recognizing the importance of these processes, preparations for the United Nations Conference on Environ- ment and Development (UNCED 1992) identified four fragile eco-systems of the world - i.e., regions with severe deforestation or desertification, the low-lying coastal areas and the "vanishing" islands.' 63 1993 by Astri Suhrke.
    [Show full text]
  • Eldridge, the Sixth Extinction
    The Sixth Extinction (ActionBioscience) Page 1 of 6 biodiversity environment genomics biotechnology evolution new frontiers educator resources home search topic directory e-newsletter your feedback contact us The Sixth Extinction Niles Eldredge An ActionBioscience.org original article »en español articlehighlights Can we stop the devastation of our planet and save our own species? We are in a biodiversity crisis — the fastest mass extinction in Earth’s history, largely due to: z human destruction of ecosystems z overexploitation of species and natural resources z human overpopulation z the spread of agriculture z pollution June 2001 There is little doubt left in the minds of professional biologists that Earth is currently faced with a mounting loss of species that threatens to rival the five About 30,000 great mass extinctions of the geological species go past. As long ago as 1993, Harvard extinct annually. biologist E.O. Wilson estimated that Earth is currently losing something on the order of 30,000 species per year — which breaks down to the even more daunting Tyrannosaurus rex skull and upper vertebral column, a victim of the fifth major extinction. Palais de la statistic of some three species per hour. Découverte, Paris, photo by David.Monniaux. Some biologists have begun to feel that this biodiversity crisis — this “Sixth Extinction” — is even more severe, and more imminent, than Wilson had supposed. Extinction in the past The major global biotic turnovers were all caused by physical events that lay outside the normal climatic and other physical disturbances which species, and entire ecosystems, experience and survive. What caused them? z First major extinction (c.
    [Show full text]
  • The Weave of Life
    The Weave of Life In approaching the ’Season of Creation’ I would like to reflect on the fact that we live in an evolving and expanding universe where nothing is entirely fixed, unchanging or predictable, all is in process of Becoming. The process of evolution, of God’s creative energy constantly flaring forth in newness, is the essence of mystery. “The universe as a whole in all its manifold relationships shows forth the inexhaustible richness of God” (LS 86). Our Common Home is abundantly endowed for the good of all life. These resources, while abundant, are finite, and therefore need responsible management in co-operation with Earth’s processes. “Soil, water, mountains: everything is, as it were, a caress of God” (LS.84). I recall an insight during the global financial crash in 2008/9 when I came face to face with the ominous reality of ‘a what if moment? What if any of the vital living systems of planet earth were to crash and no longer function? If we – the community of all life – were to be deprived of sunshine, fresh air, clean water, fertile soil or the companionship of each other, who or what could ‘bail us out’? The billions, even trillions of euros, yen, sterling or dollars of the financial crisis response, would be powerless in face of such an irreversible tragedy. The air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat and the sunlight that nurtures and sustains us and all beings ultimately relies on biodiversity. Biological diversity is the stunning variety of life on earth in all its forms, species, interrelationships, and ecosystems: life in the oceans, on land, in the skies and sub-surface bacteria.
    [Show full text]