We need to change the focus
The environment is rarely considered a central topic in public policy discussions or in private companies’ decision-making, despite the fact that we live in a world with limited natural resources. This historical neglect has led us to the current global crisis in biodiversity and ecosystem services, which are the benefits we obtain from nature.
The impacts resulting from changes in land and sea use, direct exploitation of biodiversity, pollution and climate change are becoming increasingly present in our society, reflected in the increase in social inequality and food and climate insecurity around the world.
Human actions have already altered 75% of terrestrial environments and 66% of marine environments, with 1/3 of the planet’s land and 75% of fresh water being destined for agribusiness¹. This fact generates significant impacts not only on biodiversity, with an estimated 1 million species threatened with extinction, but also on the benefits we receive from nature and the planet’s ability to support our populations.
Land degradation has reduced the productivity of 23% of the global surface, while the loss of pollinators alone threatens US$577 billion in annual agricultural production. The degradation of coastal habitats threatens the safety of 100 to 300 million people due to floods and hurricanes².
In addition to harming millions of species around the world, these impacts affect fundamental human rights, such as the rights to access to clean water, adequate food, housing and a healthy environment³.
Governments must take steps to progressively achieve full access to these rights over time, which unfortunately often does not happen. Large-scale projects are installed without prevention and mitigation of socio-environmental impacts, often failing to comply with the licensing process stages and preventing local communities from accessing water and from being able to cultivate their crops. Environmental impact studies themselves do not appear to adequately consider issues involving biodiversity, which ultimately contributes to the reduction of native species and the ecosystem services they provide.
Transparent and technically sound discussion processes often take a back seat to political decisions that envision short-term benefits, and uncertain future losses are irresponsibly accepted. Impacts go unnoticed due to flawed legislation, hidden interests or a system that fails to adequately assess complex impacts, which ultimately makes the damage suffered by populations invisible.
Indigenous communities, which are often not even consulted during the process of installing projects – which constitutes a clear disregard for Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization – are in a particularly vulnerable situation when faced with invasions of their territories by extractive activities.
Legal accountability of companies whose production chains are driving environmental destruction and generating serious human rights violations is essential.
We cannot remain inactive in the face of increasing biodiversity loss, the disregard for the rights of countless peoples and the rights of the entire global population that will suffer the effects of climate change and the reduction of ecosystem services. These impacts tend to worsen more and more and we need to act to prevent further damage and restore the environments.
Unfortunately, in Brazil and other parts of the world there is still no specific legislation to safeguard the rights of groups harmed by confusing supply chains, often linked to barbaric crimes such as murder and slavery.
In addition to fighting for better and fairer legislation, it is essential to change the way the environment is considered in our society. It is not a part of the whole; we are part of it and depend on it. Great civilizations of the past were led to ruin because they were slow to understand this lesson.
The environment and socio-environmental issues must become the central focus of discussions involving territorial development and management. To this end, it is necessary to draw the population’s attention to socio-environmental issues, investing in education to increase people’s awareness of the importance of nature and aggregating the different ecosystem services of a region to draw the attention of decision-makers to their conservation⁵, focusing on values that generate understanding among people⁶ and are essential for maintaining the quality of life and well-being of the local population⁷.
It is necessary to ensure that socio-environmental impacts and ecosystem services are included in cost-benefit analyses for correct decision-making on territorial development, in order to avoid the privatization of profits and the socialization of losses. Considering that the crisis tends to worsen in the coming years, we must be willing to face this reality.
¹ Díaz, S. et al., 2019. Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). United Nations 7 session.
² Díaz, S., et al., 2018. Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science (80-. ). 359, 270–272. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap8826
³ Some instruments that address these rights in the sphere of international law are the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In the sphere of the United Nations, there are Special Rapporteurs on the right to food and water and sanitation who regularly produce important reports on these topics.
⁴ Dias, A., et al., 2022. Are Environmental Impact Assessments effectively addressing the biodiversity issues in Brazil? Environmental Impact Assessment Review. Vol 95. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0195925522000671
⁵ Hérivaux, C., Grémont, M., 2019. Valuing a diversity of ecosystem services: The way forward to protect strategic groundwater resources for the future? Ecosystem. Serv. 35, 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.12.011
⁶ Weyland, F., et al, 2019. Ecosystem services approach in Latin America: From theoretical promises to real applications. Ecosystem. Serv. 35, 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.11.010
⁷ Grima, N., et al., 2016. Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) in Latin America: Analyzing the performance of 40 case studies. Ecosystem. Serv. 17, 24– 32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.010
Authors: Monique Salerno, Elisa Mousinho and Matteus Carvalho.
