How to think about biodiversity & conserve it

Social media, industry and western societies globally are slowly picking up the pace when it comes to covering climate change and biodiversity decline. Perhaps the world is starting to believe in it, see that the signs today could not be bigger or brighter and that we, the western world particularly, need to do something about it. In May of last year, scientists recorded carbon in our atmosphere to reach over 425.01 parts per million - a new record. It was also declared by climate scientists that we have far exceeded our 1.5 degree warming target. 

Despite our technological and scientific advances, we cannot know for sure how many species roam the earth with us, although scientists estimate around 8.7 to 9 million remain. However, what is for certain is the rate of decline with over 69% of species of mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, plants and fungus having reduced at alarming rates since 1970.

1 million species are threatened with complete extinction today as well.

Subsequently, 36 biodiversity hotspots have been discovered around the globe by scientists, rich in species diversity but severely threatened by human activities. If only we realised that our economic and general survival is embedded in nature, not external and governing it, these figures would diminish. What if we connected to and realised that we are now globally operating outside six of the nine planetary boundaries, critical for maintaining ecosystem services and stability. 

When it comes to solving human-induced conflicts whether it be environmental decline, world wars or continued humanitarian suffering it is important to look at what is the powerhouse governing it all. What could be at the centre of these issues.

The human brain, perhaps?

Wherever we are born, whatever the colour of our skin is, if you were to glance down onto our brain you will see a divided neo cortex, a left and right hemisphere. Although there is huge debate over the exact roles and separation of these hemispheres, the way in which they perceive the world and how to survive within it are very different. 

It is stated that the left hemisphere is said to be focused on the ‘small picture’, set on achieving specific goals and manipulating its environment to do so. It is far more digital, linear and mechanistic. In comparison, the right hemisphere tends to see the ‘big picture’ and has an unfocused viewpoint on the world in a more holistic, creative and compassionate sense. Now however, the left brain seems to get its way fixed in its survival, narrow-minded, mode.

Of course, it is due to our brain and its evolution that has enabled us to hunt, produce fire, create the wheel, industrialise and increase health care. But it has also enslaved millions of people, colonised countries and inflicted war across the globe and continues to. 

One thing that remains true is its mechanistic view of nature as a machine, not an innate being. A left-hemisphere outlook on nature has led it to be systematically used up, diminished and dis-connected from. It is our natural right hemisphere's ability to perceive the importance of conserving healthy biodiverse systems and working with them, not against them.

Not everyone and their brains have and continue to perceive nature like this. Farmers would have once sowed seeds into the soil with respect, a woodman would fell an individual tree and not a whole forest and many indigenous communities believed, and still do, that nature is their kin. So where did the western, rapidly advancing, world go wrong? If we are able to understand how the left and right brain imprint on the world, then we can begin to understand greater philosophical arguments such as global biodiversity decline, our reliance on fossil fuels and cognitive dissonance over our actions towards the natural world. 

We need to think about the way we think about nature. Makes sense?

When considering how the left brain perceives the world, it is hard not to compare it to reductionist ways of thinking. Seeking to isolate and study individual components of issues, reductionism is a psychological perspective that seeks to understand small cogs of a system to understand the whole. This is how scientists have approached complex issues before with huge success. Complex issues such as molecular biology or chemistry are best understood by breaking down and understanding their atomic structures. True.

However, understanding a system as complex as the natural world and how to interact with it cannot be split into small fragments and separated. Nature is a highly intertwined being that hosts many reciprocal relationships within it. This is where holism comes into play. In psychology, holism explains the interconnectedness of differing aspects of human behaviour and the importance of their interaction. It views humans as individuals composed of complex systems where factors such as culture, emotions and cognition shape who you are. 

Notably, people in industry and finance have predominantly hosted the reductionist approach. With their blinkers on they are focused on one aspect and fail to see the consequences of their actions on the whole system. Ecologists do not believe that this ‘silver bullet’ approach will solve our problems relating to environmental decline, economic growth and health care. As we are seeing, fossil fuel companies are profiting hugely on that silver bullet to economic growth. Meanwhile, the natural world suffers and the services we rely on are threatened globally. 

In relation to biodiversity decline, a holistic view takes a step back and analyses various factors that are adding to the existential crisis. Factors such as intensive farming, soil degradation, deforestation, desertification, acidification and famine that all come because of a warming world. It may seem obvious that ‘reducing emissions will equal less climatic changes but the system’s this affects is multi-faceted and simply cannot be fixed with one solution. To make change, a holistic approach is preferred that reconciles the diversity of people, their knowledge and communities. Conservation cannot be just for ‘conservationists’, it must be incorporated into our everyday actions and business decisions. 

A holistic view further embraces the saying,

‘Man did not weave the web of life. He is merely a strand within it and whatever he does to the web he does to himself’. So, who would we become if we honoured the non-human world as if it matters to us and to them? Why has this not been incorporated into our learning and early education? 

As a people, wherever you are from, whatever the colour of your skin, religion or sandwich choice we must come together and protect the one thing we all have in common. Nature. It isn’t just about being inclusive to each other but to the natural world and how our actions are affecting it now and in the future. Recognising our wonderful human ability to think and live we must work to better recognise the wonder and importance of the natural world, before it is far too late.