The concept of "biodiversity" is relatively new, stemming from the work of scientists and environmental activists in the 1980s who were concerned about the destruction of tropical rainforests and other natural ecosystems.^[1] Its importance was immediately recognized by the international community, as is evident in the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity along side such a high-profile international agreements as the Convention on Climate Change at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit) in Rio DeJaneiro. The Convention on Biodiversity, which had been ratified by over 150 countries, (including Japan) as of 2005^[2], defines biodiversity on three levels, illustrating that biodiversity is not limited to species diversity, but includes all levels of diversity of life.^[3]

1. Genetic diversity
2. Species diversity
3. Ecosystem diversity

Biodiversity: Nature's Infrastructure

Protecting a healthy state of genetic species and ecosystem diversity means more than maintaining nature's beauty. It also means protecting the basic functions that provide the natural infrastructure for all human activity, including economic. The Millennium Assessment^[4], a large-scale study under the auspices of the United Nations running from 2001-2005, illustrates the international community's growing understanding of and interest in the value of biodiversity and ecosystem services to human society. The Millennium Assessment is described in greater detail below, but this large undertaking itself was a sign of the increasing recognition of the link between biodiversity, ecosystem health and the economy.^[5]

For the past forty years, The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources has been maintaining the "IUCN Red List of Threatened Species." According to their 2004 report (2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. A Global Species Assessment), around 844 species have been confirmed extinct since 1500, with 27 of these extinctions recorded within the last twenty years.^[6] There are currently 15,589 threatened species. 12% of birds 23% of mamals, and 32% of amphibians are threatened with extinction. However, there is a still a gap in threatened species calculations as, while 40% of vertibrates have been evaluated, there is still not enough data regarding river and ocean dwelling species, invertibrates, plants, and fungi. In total, scientists have only been able to evaluate about 3% of a total estimated 1.9 million species. Given that, we can assume that the true amount of threatened species is actually much higher.

Accurately estimating the total number of species and speed of extinction is difficult, but one approach uses the number of threatened species as a base. The IUCN reports that, of all known classifications, one-fourth of all mammals are on the red list while the figure for primates may be as high as one half.^{[2] [6]}

Using another approach, The Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) measures the number of individual animals living in a given ecosystem, judging changes in biodiversity by comparing current numbers to those from previous years. The results are compiled as the Living Planet Index (LPI) and published periodically in the Living Planet Report. The following results from the 2004 report show that of 3,000 population data sets representing a total of more than 1,100 species, non-human populations in almost all ecosystems are shrinking.

1. Land species (431 temperate and 124 tropical species surveyed)
   Between 1970 and 2000, the average number of temperate species fell by over 10%, and tropical species fell by 65%. The difference between these numbers reflects the more rapid loss of habitat in tropical regions.
2. Fresh water species (269 temperate and 54 tropical species surveyed)
   Average species population has fallen by 50% in 30 years, making this the highest overall loss of all ecosystems targeted in the survey.
3. Marine species (267 species of mammals, birds, reptiles, and fish surveyed)
   Showing a 30% decrease.

Figure 1: WWF "Living Planet Index"
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment ^[5]

Some 1,360 scientists from 95 countries participated in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), making it the largest assessment of ecosystem health in history. To borrow the words of Janet A. Ranganathan, World Resources Institute (WRI), who was involved as one of the leaders of the project in its closing phases, the MA is to biodiversity what IPCC is to climate change. (IPCC - see Chapter two, Part One).

The Millennium Assessment evaluates the value and function of the earth's ecosystems by looking closely at how they provide the basis of human activity and welfare (Figure 2).

1) Indirect Support Services

Ecosystems provide basic functions needed to maintain human life, including soil generation, photosynthesis (primary production), nutrient cycles, and the water cycle.

2) Direct Ecosystem Services

The services we directly benefit from are made possible by a healthy ecosystem.
Provisioning services: genetic resources, food and fiber, water, textiles, fuel, etc.
Regulation services: atmospheric pollution control, climate regulation, flood control, disease control, water purification, and plant pollination.
Cultural Services: spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experience.

Figure 2: Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment ^[5]

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment views the services we get from the ecosystem as basic to human welfare, satisfying such needs as safety, basic materials for a good life, buildings, good personal relations, and freedom of choice.

Of the twenty-four ecosystem services assessed by the MA, fifteen (70%) were found to be in a state of decline, five remained steady, and only four were improving in the latter half of the 20th century. Three of the services found to be improving are supply services (production of grain, livestock, and fish), and the last, climate regulation is included due to an estimated larger global capacity of ecosystems to fix CO₂. It is important to note that these improvements were found to have occurred in the last half of the 20th century with no guarantee that this trend will continue.

Table 1: 24 Ecosystem Services and their Condition at the End of the 20th Century
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment ^[4]

The MA examines the preservation of biodiversity from multiple angles, showing that preservation of biodiversity is not only an economic issue, but also has cultural implications for current society as well as future generations. From an economic standpoint as well as a social standpoint, it is important that the ability of the earth's ecosystems to provide necessary ecosystem services be preserved.

“Ecosystem services are one of a nation's assets. However, with regards to the merits of a more appropriate management of this asset, traditional economic indicators have not duly reflected its importance. For example, over-logging of forests and degradation of marine resources lowers the value of national assets. Yet, the GDP does not take into account the contribution of such assets to the future stability of society, and in most cases a loss of natural assets is reflected as an increase in, GDP. If natural assets were properly reflected in national accounts, countries relying primarily on natural resources would find that their wealth and potential for prosperity is declining. Several countries that showed positive economic growth between 1970 and 1980 are now experiencing substantial loss in resource asset value. It is clear that the basis of their growth was not sustainable."^[2]

It is impossible to ignore the fact that human life and activity is highly dependent on biodiversity. However, if human utilization and welfare is the only reason we have for preserving biodiversity, it will be difficult to change the current situation. As one Japanese scientist pointed out in an interview for this report, "In our relations with friends we don't cut ourselves off from people because a cost-benefit analysis judges them to be worthless. Yet, when it comes to our relations with other living beings, we drive them to extinction based only on the idea that they do not provide enough value.”^[6]

Edward O. Wilson, the distinguished Harvard professor who was one of the first people to widely promote the concept of biodiversity, makes the following comment with regards to preserving biodiversity and the inheritance of future generations:

“The issue, like all great decisions, is moral. Science and technology are what we can do; morality is what we agree we should or should not do.”^[7]

1. Leveque, C., Mounolou, J-C., Biodiversity. (John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2004)
2. Izumi Washitani, Kazuhiko Takeuchi, Mutsumi Nishid, "Seinoukei e no manazashi" [A Look at the Ecosystem], (University of Tokyo Publishing, 2005)
3. Convention on Biological Diversity. http://www.biodiv.org (accessed November, 2005)
4. Mellennium Ecosystem Assesment. http://millenniumassessment.org (accessed November, 2005)
5. World Resources Institute "Ecosystems and Human Well-Being, Biodiversity Synthesis, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment"(WRI: 2005) http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Products.Sysnthesis.aspx (accessed November, 2005)
6. International Union for the Conservation of Nature A Global Species Assessment 2004. (IUCN: 2004).
7. Matsuda Hiroyuki. Interview, August 28, 2005
8. Wilson, E. O. The Future of Life. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2002)