In November 2017, scientists working in Sumatra, Indonesia, made an exciting announcement: They had discovered a new species of orangutan, bringing to seven the number of great ape species globally.
However, one year later, the only home of the 800 wild Tapanuli orangutans was being cleared for a US$1.6 billion dam and hydroelectric power plant. Although the project would contribute less than 1 percent of the country’s planned generating capacity, scientists said that it would lead to the extinction of this rare species. This raises, once again, a key question: What is nature worth?
Indonesia is not alone in making environmentally detrimental trade-offs. The 21st century will be a period of unprecedented infrastructure expansion and a staggering US$90 trillion is to be spent over the next 15 years to build or replace dams, power plants and other facilities. More infrastructure is to be built over the next decade and a half than currently exists. Naturally, habitats would be disrupted.
And yet, environmentally reckless growth is not preordained; it is possible to make smart, sustainable choices. To do so, people must recognize the true value of nature and make environmental ethics and cost-benefit analyses part of every project.
At the moment, this is not happening; most infrastructure is planned and constructed on the basis of market assessments that fail to account for nature. As a result, the world is facing a growing crisis: the weakening of ecosystem services — such as clean water, flood defense and bee pollination — that protect biodiversity and form the foundation on which human welfare depends.
To change the “status quo,” wean ethical choice must be made to not expose critical habitats and “natural capital” to greater danger — regardless of the possible economic returns. Just as most of the world has rejected the use of slave or child labor, the permanent destruction of nature must be repudiated.
Some economists have recognized this by building environmental costs into their arguments; the Amazon rain forest is a case in point. There, deforestation has reduced the production of vapor clouds that are essential to transporting rain across South America. A drought that hit Sao Paulo from 2014 to 2017 is believed to have been caused, at least in part, by the absence of these “flying rivers.”
As the Brazilian climate scientist Antonio Nobre has noted, if these aerial water pumps are permanently turned off, an area that accounts for 70 percent of South America’s gross national product would be turned into desert.
Of course, identifying critical natural capital is challenging, especially at smaller scales. While many can agree on the importance of protecting the Amazon, it is harder to demonstrate the value of preserving orangutans in Indonesia.
However, over time, the loss of the Tapanuli orangutan’s habitat would profoundly change the composition of the rain forest and disrupt its ecological services. At the same time, the elimination of a species of great ape — humanity’s closest kin — would erase an opportunity to better understand our own evolution and genetics.
In the developed world, some governments and businesses are making the ethical choice by applying the “precautionary principle” to growth. Adopted in 1992 as part of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the principle embodies the conclusion that it is wiser — and ultimately cheaper — to avoid environmental degradation in the first place.
The real challenge is to instill this ethos in developing economies, where the bulk of future infrastructure spending will occur.
Consider highway development. By 2050, there will be 24.94 million kilometers of new paved roads, enough to circle the Earth more than 600 times. More than 90 percent of this fresh pavement would be laid in developing countries, which already face huge environmental pressure.
For example, in the Amazon region there are nearly 53,000 mining leases encompassing 21 percent of the basin’s land mass. In Guinea, a World Bank-supported dam is reportedly threatening a key chimpanzee sanctuary. In Tanzania, the government has approved a dam and hydroelectric plant in the Selous Game Reserve, a UNESCO World Heritage site.
With human needs increasing as populations and incomes grow, there are legitimate reasons to build more infrastructure. However, if current trends continue, short-term interests will strip away the natural assets on which all life depends.
To plan for smart development, governments and business must recognize nature’s role in supporting economic activity and ensuring ecological and human health. After all, humanity does not — and cannot — live in a world where nature has no value.
Maxwell Gomera, a 2018 Aspen New Voices fellow, is director of the Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Branch at the UN Environment Programme.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past