An argument for biodiversity conservation
Introduction
The ecosystem can be defined by a community of living and non-living organisms, interacting as a system. Energy is required for the completion of each cycle as it is an essential part for photosynthesis as well as plant tissues. External and internal factors control ecosystems. External factors include climate, topography while the internal factors are controlled by decompositions, shading, and root competition, among others. Ecosystems are an important part of the environment and are regarded as dynamic entities. They are, at times subject to periodic disturbances and are at times not given enough room to recover from previous disruptions. Ecosystems in various parts of the world can work differently since they all have different species present. The internal factors controlling the ecosystem do not only control it but are controlled by the ecosystem as well, thereby creating feedback loops. Internal factors control resource availability in the ecosystem. Human beings have a high contribution when it comes to influencing external factors, for example, climate. Biodiversity affects the ecosystem in a significant way. Ecosystems come up with a variety of goods and services that people rely on for survival.
One of the main justifications for the conservation of biodiversity is that species are important for diversity and the maintenance of ecosystem services. However, one thing that most people tend to forget is that most of the ecosystem services are not supported by whole ecosystems but a group of species that fulfils the essential functional criteria. Conservationists have failed to recognize the enormous difference between resilient and sensitive ecosystem services. This threatens the credibility of conservation science but increases the chances of service provision for the ecosystem. It is important that conservationists not only look for ways on how to preserve the ecosystem but also to understand the resilience and sensitivity of maintaining the ecosystem. The maintenance of biological diversity must be used for the sustainability of provisions necessary for the ecosystem. The preservation of the ecosystem has gone beyond international treaties, the national legislations, and scientific organizations even academic textbooks. The conservation of biodiversity is important for the future material well-being for humanity even though the notion that species provision is not done wholly but by just a small number of species. Species extinction, as well as the provision of ES (ecosystem), has been the reason for the highly debated statement about the ecosystem.
Human activities have been a significant impact on the ecosystem. Human activities are endless; they have factories, practice agriculture, dams, and solar panels, among others. All of these things have an impact on the ecosystem in one way or the other. Today, human beings are at an era called the Anthropogenic timeline. This era dictates the significance social activities have on the earth’s atmospheric systems. A lot of changes in the climate has also been brought about by this problem. For example, cutting down trees in forests, change how the species live and survive, which in turn has an impact on the ecosystem. Building a dam along a river’s course will interfere with the way species in that river live. These species will be forced to either change and adapt to a new life of living or move to another friendly place. If they happen to shift, the area left will have been negatively impacted. There will be less development on the ecosystem in this area. Human beings should, therefore, look forward to conserving the environment as well as the ecosystem.
Biodiversity has been a term that has highly been misused and misinterpreted. To begin with, biodiversity refers to biological diversity, whereas, on the other hand, it relates to non-human life. The latter focuses on a single usage of available species while the former focuses more on the diversity of species. Most people believe that the latter is often more convenient, but it can as well be misleading and wrong (Collins, James, et al., 2000). To avoid this confusion, there should be a clear understanding and distinguishing of the specific features of biodiversity. In the non-human life notion, it would be true to say that biodiversity is vital for the provision of ES. However, this might not at all be genuinely looking at it on the other side of the context. One of the things that biodiversity will cater for as per those arguments brought forward is that there is no extinction, meaning they should find out the causes and consequences that will follow in case there is the disappearance of species. An argument brought forward by Anne Erhlich is that it is crucial to fight the extinction of species as the following might happen. (1) Ecosystems will collapse if species become extinct, (2) if the ecosystem collapses, then it will have to be artificially provided which will be (a) expensive and (b) inadequate to sustain a whole lot of living things. (3) Given the fast rate of species extinction, slow reaction to this problem might bring forward an even bigger problem. This means that all species be conserved top avoid the disastrous consequences that will follow later, maybe come up with a precautionary principle for this.
It is important to note that ecological relationships exist between species which can be used in presenting these categories. Functional groups vary in time and space and therefore, to mean that they cannot be unchanging entities as they are often described to be. Climate change tends to affect the provision of the ecosystem profoundly; hence another big consideration one needs to make (Deliège, Glenn, Stijn, 2015). Due to global warming, there is a high need for the ES to be protected. This is where biodiversity comes in to protect the species, especially those found within the range of climatic zones. By doing this, conservationists will be adding a backup of populations in providing these species. Since ES is highly sensitive, any special connections between biodiversity and ecosystems might be used. It is also important for the ecosystem to remain strong or there will be a reduction in the areas that where ES can be assigned using the first two categories, there is (Jax, Kurt, Ulrich, 2015). For one to tell the implications of future climate change, it is important that take the task to note the level of resilience for every ecosystem. It might require abit of complex remodelling to get through this. Still, one can quickly get through observing how a specific ES is can be affected by the level of ecological stresses it faces in that bioregion.
It is evident that if conservation is limited to the provision of the ecosystem alone, it would even be more comfortable for conservationists to devote their time entirely to managing and protecting each species there is. It will also be necessary for the provision of an identified ecosystem service. Biodiversity is essential but only in areas where valued ES are particularly sensitive to changes occurring in the environment.
The ES comprises of dependent on functional group of species whose fate is small due to various factors such as natural rarity and high sensitivity to change. Research has proven that biodiversity will increase the functioning and stability of the ecosystem. This has been backed up by a variety of relationship and has shown that it works. Everything here would be sufficient to prove that these relationships will prevent the decline of species which will, on the other hand, result in an even better and valued ecosystem. The use of the precautionary principle, together with the conservation of biodiversity is essential when it comes to preserving the ecosystem.
The low rise assumption gives rise to and is at most times, reinforced by the claims within the conservation literature that ES depend highly on biodiversity. There are a lot of controversial issues that have notably explained the advantages of protecting and maintaining the ecosystem. This has sparked a lot of discussions like the one mentioned in the introduction part. Most authors forget this vital part on the low resilience assumption and therefore end up placing claims in the absence of any proof or evidence to back up their allegations.
The maintenance of the ecosystem has been a compelling argument that goes back and forth in regards to biodiversity. However, it is essential to reduce the degradation and adverse effects for the ecosystem for a better tomorrow. Human and natural causes should not be a reason to tamper and damage the ecosystem. All living things will be needing it in the future, and therefore all need to participate in protecting the ecosystem. If there were a steady supply of species, for example, a whole ecosystem rather than a group of species, the ecosystem would be at its best. It is common for species to reduce or increase in case there is a resilient to change. This brings about a considerable flaw in the justification for biodiversity conservation that highly tends to undermine how the precautionary principle works. It is also difficult to explain whether or not there will be a loss of a particular species will affect the functioning of the ecosystem.
Acknowledging the limits of the ecosystem on the argument about biodiversity is essential since it will play a significant role in maintaining the ecosystem. The contrary arguments on the implications of the ecosystem should not be more than those that will focus directly into protecting and maintaining the ES. Also, biodiversity should become a secondary goal that should be used in maintaining the ecosystem. This goal should become a principal method for managing the areas and species that are considered as wild and natural. Biodiversity is an integral part of the maintenance of the ecosystem and should be considered by all without fail. The future depends on the actions that will happen today, and therefore the ecosystem should be maintained.
Work cited
Collins, James P., et al. “A new urban ecology: modelling human communities as integral parts of ecosystems poses special problems for the development and testing of ecological theory.” American scientist 88.5 (2000): 416-425.
Deliège, Glenn, and Stijn Neuteleers. “Should biodiversity be useful? Scope and limits of ecosystem services as an argument for biodiversity conservation.” Environmental Values 24.2 (2015): 165-182.
Jax, Kurt, and Ulrich Heink. “Searching for the place of biodiversity in the ecosystem services discourse.” Biological Conservation 191 (2015): 198-205.