The Chair of a new UN biodiversity organisation has warned that a loss of diversity in domesticated plants and animals is jeopardising the resilience of the food system. Zakri Abdul Hamid said on Monday (27th May) that the loss of agricultural biodiversity constitutes "a fundamental threat to the well-being and even the survival of humankind."

image expired

Professor Zakri was elected as chair of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, a newly formed independent body modelled on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in January this year. The group aims to halt or reverse biodiversity loss, uniting international biodiversity experts and conveying their findings to the world's policy makers, whilst engaging with other stakeholders including NGOs and indigenous communities.

Speaking in Norway, Dr. Zakri said the disappearance of Earth's species, both wild and domesticated, could forever impact upon the health of ecosystems and their ability to produce food. He warned, "We are hurtling towards irreversible environmental tipping points that, once passed, would reduce the ability of ecosystems to provide essential goods and services to humankind."

He explained that preserving a wealth of genetic diversity in all plants and animals is incredibly important, as some may have resistance to new diseases or be more adaptable to climatic shifts, and that because of this protection of rich habitats such as forests and oceans is an absolute imperative.

The IPBES Chair added that, with farmed species, neglected breeds and varieties of animals and plants could also prove to be invaluable. However, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates that between 80 and 90 percent of fruit and vegetable varieties grown widely in the 19th Century were lost by the end of the 20th due to the homogenising effects of industrial agriculture. This includes 95 percent of cabbage varieties, 94 percent of peas, and 81 percent of tomatoes. With the inclusion of field crops, Zakri put the rate of decline nearer to 75 percent over the past century.

Dr Zakri pledged this week that "IPBES will reduce the gulf between the wealth of scientific knowledge on declining natural world conditions, and knowledge about effective action to reverse these damaging trends." In many nations seed banks and breeding programmes already exist to protect threatened or older domestic species.

Even barnyard diversity is in decline

Some scientists have deemed to the mass-declines to be the "sixth great extinction episode" in Earth's history, according to Dr. Zakri. Discussing the implications of reduced biodiversity 'in the barnyard', he pointed to work by the FAO, which has striven to reduce losses of domesticated species. He said, "The good news is the rate of decline is dropping but the latest data classify 22 percent of domesticated breeds at risk of extinction;" (domestic species are deemed to be at risk of extinction when 1,000 individuals of the breed are known to exist).

Causes of 'genetic erosion' in domestic plants and animals are the lack of appreciation of the value of indigenous breeds and their importance in niche adaptation. Often incentives to introduce exotic and more uniform breeds from industrialised countries and product-focused selection play a significant role in this (such as the selection of verities of fruit that travel well or last longer for supermarket distribution models in industrialised nations).

Of the 30,000 edible plant species available, only 30 crops account for 95 percent of human food energy, the bulk of which (60 per cent) comes down to rice, wheat, maize, millet and sorghum.

"The decline in the diversity of crops and animals is occurring in tandem with the need to sharply increase world food production and as a changing environment makes it more important than ever to have a large genetic pool to enable organisms to withstand and adapt to new conditions," the professor stated.

Biodiversity and the Sustainable Development Goals

Following on from the Millennium Development Goals, set at the turn of the last century to drive development between 2000 and 2015, the new Sustainable Development Goals are expected to feature biodiversity protection more prominently.

Dr Zakri pointed to existing international agreements, which value habitat protection and support for ecosystem health and biodiversity. Although he said current agreements form a relatively good starting point, the professor added, "I would argue, though, that advancing towards equity and sustainable development requires us to go beyond. We need to meet the fundamental challenge of decoupling economic growth from natural resource consumption, which is forecast to triple by 2050 unless humanity can find effective ways to 'do more and better with less.' There are no simple blueprints for addressing a challenge as vast and complex as this but it's imperative we commit to that idea."

The IPBES Chair also suggested that valuing 'development' in terms of its benefits on wellbeing and environmental health should be encouraged. He said, "We need measures of societal progress that go beyond Gross Domestic Product. We need the kind of vision embodied in the Inclusive Wealth Index being pioneered by Sir Partha Dasgupta of Cambridge University, Anantha Duraiappah at IHDP, and Pushpam Kumar at UNEP. As they have convincingly argued, enlightened measures of wealth that include natural capital, not just output like GDP, offer a real portrait of sustainable development."

Drawing towards a conclusion in Olso, and exploring the idea of 'natural capital', Dr Zakri conceded that "The idea that natural capital should be measured like this makes many nervous." He added that measuring irreplaceable natural functions such as clean water and air in monetary terms is understandably troubling and stated that "In practice, natural assets are often hard to price well, if at all."

However, ultimately, he warned that recent experience with the Millennium Development Goals has demonstrated all too clearly the limited success that even legally-binding biodiversity commitments have in the absence of "some sort of metric" that speaks to the different interests driving policy, changing land-use and consuming resources.