Natural capital in concept works. They know it, we know it, but how come it rarely translates at the coal-face of sustainable development?

Ecologist, Morgan Taylor, living and working in London his background is in marine biology, his work focusses on urban biodiversity, green infrastructure and the more strategic approach to nature conservation in our cities and urban spaces.

In Fitness check for Nature he discusses some of the big issues that face nature conservation in the UK. in it he asks to

Forget the calls for the designation of Marine Conservation Zone near to Cardigan Bay (127 were recommended with 23 actually created around the UK) this entirely undermines the existing paradigm for inshore conservation effort.

He also states that

Special Areas of Conservation are designated by the UK government under the European Commission’s Habitats Directive, 1992, which requires the establishment of a Europe wide network of important conservation sites. Along with Special Protection Areas these sites are part of the Natura 2000 network and protect over 200 habitat types and 1000 key stone species.

For him, as for me, it is clear that

It’s not the Directives that are broken, it’s the implementation. If a police force were failing to prevent murders from occurring, you wouldn’t blame the legislation for being too onerous, you would probably look to address how the police were enforcing the legislation.

We all should know that

Decoupling the environment from the economy is a dangerous move. It seems shocking that the value of the natural world does not appear to be appreciated by those that can make a difference; not that there’s a great precedent set by politicians for promoting evidence based policy when it doesn’t directly correlate to electability, unless it’s based on circumstantial, heavily extrapolated or fictional data of course.

*

To remember

In his last blog (before December 9) he focused on the threat of reduced protection for our most valued wildlife conservation sites.

the consensus = wildlife conservation legislation = fit for purpose

need to fundamentally re-think our approach at the small scale (i.e. in every planning decision and design team meeting) to align with science base + societal long term goals

Maybe we can then see some meaningful results.

nature provides value for us

green economy = crucial model > underpins entire notion of sustainable development > encourage growth >> relies upon decoupling between growth + our environmental footprint

we can achieve greater resource efficiency whilst fuelling economic growth

+

Preceding articles:

Postponing once more

Summary for the year 2015 #1 Threat and fear

Summary for the year 2015 # 2 Strewn with corpses and refugees

Paris World Summit of Conscience, International interfaith gathering #1

2015 Ecology

++

Additional reading

1. Here and now
2. Temperatures rising
3. First man’s task still counting today
4. The natural beauties of life
5. 2015 Summit of Consciences for the Climate
6. Senator Loren Legarda says climate change not impossible to address
7. Vatican meeting of mayors talking about global warming, human trafficking and modern-day slavery
8. Solidarité: The Paris Attack and the Refugee Crisis

+++

Related articles

• Star Wars: Habitats directive ‘breached’ on Skellig Michael (irishtimes.com)
• Scotland’s wild beaver ‘shoot to kill’ policy is illegal and wrong (theecologist.org)
• Railways: Ensuring readiness in case of space weather events (eurekalert.org)
• Dombrovskis: Evaluation to be completed after mid-February says (en.protothema.gr)
• Conservatives all talk when it comes to tackling tax avoidance (leftfootforward.org)
• Time to apply for the Fair Tax Mark? (taxresearch.org.uk)
• Rare white-headed ducks sighted at Oroklini Lake (famagusta-gazette.com)
• Putting the Con into Consultation (monbiot.com)

Morgan Taylor Ecology

My last blog focused on the threat of reduced protection for our most valued wildlife conservation sites. Thankfully initial comments from Brussels were reassuring, and the headlines satiated my smugness by stating more or less what I had written; Directives work, nature is valuable, enforcement is broken etc etc.

That’s fantastic, so far the consensus is that wildlife conservation legislation is fit for purpose, and many of those in the know, at least claim, to value nature. But what does that matter if we still fail in our duties to correctly enforce and implement?

Big changes are potentially happening in Paris, but we need to fundamentally re-think our approach at the small scale (i.e. in every planning decision and design team meeting) to align with the science base and societal long term goals. Maybe we can then see some meaningful results.

There has been a lot written of late regarding…

View original post 751 more words