On Thursday 7 October a panel of experts will be discussing what we can do to protect biodiversity in advance of the Nagoya summit.
In this debate they will be responding to questions and views you post on this forum. What do you think should be discussed at Nagoya? What’s the biggest threat to biodiversity? What can we do to help to support the natural world? Tell us what you would like to ask the panel.
Is there still a role for targeted species conservation?
Large amounts of time and resources have traditionally been spent on the re-introduction and relocation of threatened or locally extinct 'native' species (eg the Red Squirrel), along with the constant battle to irradicate successful ‘alien’ species (eg the Grey Squirrel). The long-term impacts of such projects have had greatly varying degrees of success, which begs the question whether such work is viable? At a time of global economic uncertainty and environmental crisis, do the panel have any thoughts on the future role of such projects? Should targeted species work be prioritised towards those species with the greatest biodiversity value, such as pollinators, and species that act as indicators of healthy ecosystems? Or should we reject this avenue all together and instead fund only landscape scale, habitat orientated projects?
A couple of questions for the panel:
One of the major drivers of biodiversity loss is the demand for soy feeds for the intensive livestock industry, which is directly linked to deforestation in places like South America. What does the panel think the Government should be doing to reduce the impact of meat & dairy production in the UK?
Another key driver of deforestation is the large-scale production of liquid biofuels for transport and power generation. Given the difficulties involved in assessing the sustainability of biofuels and the uncertainties inherent in any certification scheme, does the panel think that the current UK & EU targets for biofuels can still be justified?