The Hidden Cost Of Conservation: Biodiversity Leakage

Conservation successes are commonly touted as vital movements towards preserving the planet's fertile ecosystems, yet one study has raised the red flag of a possible side effect: biodiversity leakage. It's what happens when conservation efforts in one area drive environmentally destructive activity—like logging or mining—out to another, usually less protected, part of the planet. Rather than eradicated, these practices potentially become more of an issue on the world at large.

Researchers at more than a dozen institutions, led by Cambridge University, discovered that conservation efforts need to factor in these secondary effects to not exacerbate the crisis they're trying to stem. Cambridge's Department of Zoology Professor Andrew Balmford says that if rich countries safeguard their forests or restrict resource mining, demand for timber, crops, or raw materials does not vanish. Rather, it shifts to areas where the regulations might be less stringent, like in some areas of Africa or South America. This shifting can cause deforestation, habitat loss, and loss of biodiversity in ecologically important but sensitive regions.

A prime example of biodiversity leakage is the conservation of old-growth forests in the United States Pacific Northwest. As much as this policy has managed to protect regional biodiversity, it has also served to drive further logging elsewhere in North America, merely displacing the environmental effects rather than curbing them. Likewise, Brazilian conservation measures intended to prevent deforestation might produce more land clearance in adjacent countries, undermining the positive effects of Brazil's initiative.

Though leakage is a concept well understood when it comes to carbon emissions—where stringent control in one country drives polluting industries to others—it has, to date, been much less understood in the context of biodiversity conservation. It appears that merely 37% of tropical conservation project managers polled knew about leakage, and fewer than half of them had management measures in place to counter it. This is a potential hazard to conservation success.

Brendan Fisher, co-author on the study from the University of Vermont, points out that recognizing the problem is half the battle in solving it. He issues a warning that if stopping logging concessions in the U.S. results in more deforestation in the tropics, the net effect on biodiversity may be harmful. In the same vein, Dr. Ben Balmford from the University of Exeter points out that the problem requires much more attention. As conservationists strive for audacious targets, such as conserving 30% of the world's land and seas by 2030, ignoring leakage can cause harm in ways that are not intended.

The research recommends that conservation policies need to be more than the mere creation of protected areas. Rather, the approach needs to be holistic and address the source of the biodiversity loss—like unsustainable agriculture, deforestation, and resource overexploitation. Conservation policies have to be so framed that displacement is avoided as much as possible and sustainable development is encouraged everywhere. That is, there needs to be equitable trade, sourcing responsibly, and increased international coordination to efficiently handle shared resources.

One of the most promising strategies is to incorporate biodiversity concerns into economic policy. Governments and conservation groups need to put biodiversity on a national and international priority list, making sure that environmental costs are factored into trade and production choices. Curbing demand for high-impact commodities like beef, soy, and palm oil can also be effective. As these commodities are leading causes of deforestation, promoting sustainable alternatives and responsible consumption is important.

Focusing conservation on high-biodiversity zones with minimal industrial activity can also limit leakage. Prioritizing areas where economic displacement is less probable, conservationists can minimize the danger of relocating damaging activities elsewhere. Simultaneously, assisting local farmers and enterprises through sustainable associations can enable production levels to be sustained while promoting biodiversity conservation.

A number of successful projects have shown how to prevent biodiversity leakage. An example is eco-friendly chocolate production in Sierra Leone, where alliances with cocoa farmers have encouraged green agriculture. Likewise, conservation programs based on communities have preserved endangered species, including snow leopards, by engaging local herders in conservation efforts. These models prove that conservation can succeed without causing displacement if economic interests are aligned with environmental objectives.

If nothing is done quickly, biodiversity leakage has the potential to erode the gains made by conservation. Conservation efforts could prove futile, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds' Dr. Fiona Sanderson warns, if the phenomenon is not given attention. At worst, warns Professor Andrew Balmford, efforts made in an attempt to safeguard biodiversity in one region hasten its destruction elsewhere without one's intention to do so.

Addressing biodiversity leakage is a matter for a change of conservation approach. Governments, enterprise, conservation associations, and communities must all participate. More effective environmental legislation, improved enforcement, and economic stimulus for sustainable manufacture are needed. International collaboration plays a critical part as well because biodiversity conservation needs to be in excess of domestic boundaries.

Eco-labeling and carbon pricing can induce sustainable practice, but it is not enough by itself. Policymakers should ensure market prices reflect the real environmental price of extracting a resource. Also important is confronting broader social and economic problems like poverty and inequality since these push unsustainable use of resources.

At the consumer level, people can do their part by making responsible decisions. Purchasing sustainably sourced products, cutting demand for high-resource consumption goods, and campaigning for more effective conservation policies are all steps towards minimizing biodiversity leakage.

The struggle against biodiversity decline is an international issue that needs coordinated efforts. Although conservation is necessary, it should be planned so that unintentional displacement can be avoided and advancement in one sector does not occur at the cost of another. Through the acknowledgment of biodiversity leakage as a key concern and more holistic strategies, the world can progress toward genuinely effective conservation measures that defend ecosystems without loading the burden elsewhere.