A new Draft Convention on Biological Diversity (see below) was released December 18th, with officials praising the spirit of compromise. This is certainly true for Target 7 addressing pollution reduction. It states:
- Reduce pollution risks and the negative impact of pollution from all sources, by 2030, to levels that are not harmful to biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, considering cumulative effects, including: reducing excess nutrients lost to the environment by at least half including through more efficient nutrient cycling and use; reducing the overall risk from pesticides and highly hazardous chemicals by at least half including through integrated pest management, taking into account food security and livelihoods; and also preventing, reducing, and working towards eliminating plastic pollution.
Are pesticides actions undermined by qualifying text?
Ambitious actions on pesticides must match the leading text, to address the severity of the crises the world is facing. Worryingly,
- pesticides reduction is now rolled in with other highly hazardous chemicals, and is watered down from two thirds to half; and
- pesticide-based "integrated pest management" (IPM) is featured while organic agriculture (Canada's fastest-expanding agricultural sector) is omitted.
Apparently the pesticide industry influenced Target 7. In Ontario, Integrated Pest Management did not reduce pesticide use on golf courses, following industry-inspired reliance on IPM in lieu of pesticide restrictions.
Critically, not addressing important contributors to biodiversity could undermine success.
COP15 draft wording is open-ended, leaving implementation to include pollutants in previous drafts: light (visible electromagnetic radiation), noise and e-waste.
Success = addressing all factors
An overlooked contributor to biodiversity loss is electromagnetic radiation from communications technologies.
Scientists have found that "wireless" radiation affects insects' and birds' health and navigation. Radiation from cell towers has been linked to local declines of animals, while effects on plants include tree gradual decline and death. Fortunately, safer communications alternatives are also faster, more resilient and lower energy. See: wirelessenviroimpacts.science
Comments
Be the first to comment