At the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, last month, the evidence of mounting threats to nature, and of nature’s contributions to people, featured higher on the agenda than ever before. The task for business leaders around the world is to embrace this evidence and start acting as stewards, rather than spoilers, of our vital natural assets.
The latest edition of the WEF’s Global Risks Report is correct in concluding that, “of all risks, it is in relation to the environment that the world is most clearly sleepwalking into catastrophe.”
However, PwC’s latest annual survey of chief executives, also released at Davos, reveals that business leaders no longer include environmental concerns in their Top 10 threats to corporate growth.
Such findings reflect an inexcusable myopia on the part of business leaders. The loss of biodiversity — stemming from the destruction of individual species, entire ecosystems, and even genetic resources — is not just an environmental issue; it is also a threat to global development, security and economic prosperity.
Products ranging from coffee to cotton rely on strong, functioning ecosystems and a minimal level of biodiversity. Without a healthy environment, forced migrations, conflicts over resources, and a range of other direct and indirect disruptions to global trade and commerce become more likely.
According to one estimate cited in this year’s Global Risks Report, the annual value of nature’s contributions to people — in the form of food, water purification, pollination, protection against floods and so forth — is US$125 trillion, or about two-thirds more than global GDP.
Hence, the WEF concludes that biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse are both more likely and potentially more damaging to business than most other global threats.
Fortunately, in November last year, prior to the 14th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP14), participants in the Business and Biodiversity Forum recognized the “urgent need for increased collective ambition to halt and reverse biodiversity loss.”
To that end, a growing number of firms have committed to such collective action. Many, for example, have signed onto the global Business and Biodiversity Pledge that was introduced at the CBD gathering in Mexico in 2016.
In July last year, companies meeting in France detailed concrete steps they are taking to safeguard biodiversity as part of the Act4Nature initiative.
By integrating biodiversity concerns into their global growth strategies, and by supporting targets set by the international community, these businesses are helping to lay the groundwork for the CBD COP15 summit in Beijing next year, when delegates are to decide on global biodiversity targets for the next decade.
Biodiversity pledges by businesses vary. AXA Insurance Co is developing new ways to account for biodiversity loss in its assessments of financial risk. This, in turn, will help channel investments toward projects that maintain or reinforce ecosystems. The French cosmetics company L’Oreal has pledged that, by next year, none of its products will include ingredients linked to deforestation.
For others seeking to incorporate biodiversity considerations into their decisionmaking, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services’ latest regional assessment reports offer a range of evidence-based policy options.
At its next plenary session in May, the platform is scheduled to release the first global assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem services since the landmark Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005. The new report is to place a much stronger emphasis on the role that all decisionmakers, including those in businesses, have to play in safeguarding biodiversity.
The scientific and expert evidence is unequivocal: Human activities are changing Earth’s climate and destroying the natural resources and ecosystems on which we all rely.
Businesses, governments, and members of civil society — including indigenous peoples and local communities — all have a duty to reduce and reverse this damage.
However, while we all need to work together, the private sector, in particular, must redouble its efforts to protect natural systems and shape the future we want. That will require business leaders with a vision that extends beyond quarterly earnings.
Around the world, customers are becoming increasingly concerned about the wider consequences of production and consumption. By recognizing that business as usual can no longer continue, corporate leaders can usher in a future that is better both for their bottom lines and for our shared natural world.
Robert Watson is chair of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS