Environmental transformation and its consequent impact on ecosystems is inextricably linked to human activity. But is our future socio-economic development dependent on further committing to biodiversity conservation and the protection of natural resources?
We talk to Alejandro Rescia, researcher at the Department of Biodiversity, Ecology and Evolution at the Complutense University of Madrid: “The environmental changes we’re seeing from human activity are giving rise to global change of the planet. This transformation of our landscape has been taking place for millennia, but it’s been proven by scientists in recent centuries, and has been accepted as a reality by society only in recent decades, ” he says.
The challenge of socio-ecological development
The footprint that humans have left throughout history can be seen worldwide, but it’s the current, mass and globalized intensive consumption model, which is producing the greatest havoc. The problem is that it’s based on activities directly related to the environment, such as mining, forestry, agriculture and livestock, and the impact on biodiversity is greater.
“Although it’s not yet the norm – especially for large companies – there are examples of best practices, such as the sensible management of the territory by rural people (farmers, ranchers, etc.) that for centuries – as is the case with the pastoral systems in Spain or Portugal – have contributed to increasing or conserving local or regional biodiversity,” says Rescia, noting the importance of maintaining this wealth of species that, in short, represents the biological component of ecosystems.
“The idea of economic development being compatible with nature conservation is what we call sustainable development, which means it doesn’t require external contributions of resources. Nor does it result in the loss of existing ones. In terms of ecological viability, it means that the rate of exploitation or consumption of resources doesn’t exceed its renewal rate,” explains the expert. To make this happen, it’s essential to adopt a holistic approach that respects the biophysical limits of the planet. Responsible use of raw materials, waste reduction and energy efficiency will be key to achieving socio-ecological sustainability.
Critical assessment of the current situation
In 2005, the results of a report commissioned by the UN were published, revealing that practically all biomes have undergone some alteration of their occupied surface, mainly due to agricultural activity. Ecological communities with characteristic fauna and vegetation, determined by the local climate and geology, are considered “biomes.” Among those most affected were Mediterranean ecosystems and temperate ecosystems. In addition, a more recent study from 2020 specified that nearly 60% of terrestrial ecosystems are subject to moderate or intense human pressure.
Although the characteristics of the most environmentally destructive practices can be determined, it’s difficult to establish an order of severity in the environmental problems generated. However, we can determine its severity: “Every year the World Economic Forum publishes a classification of the main global risks according to their severity and degree of uncertainty. The 2024 ranking showed that over the next two years the greatest risks will be disinformation, extreme weather phenomena, social polarization, cybersecurity and armed conflict. In the longer term, critical changes in land systems, loss of biodiversity and ecosystems and scarcity of natural resources also featured on the list.
To minimize these risks, action must be taken on greenhouse gas emissions: “In addition to continuing to look for alternative energy sources and improving efficiency, it’s essential to change the current consumption model, to have “less of everything”, as summarized recently in an opinion article by the writer Antonio Muñoz Molina. This implies a commitment to changing our way of life or, at least, to reducing energy consumption through specific attitudes and behaviors,” says Alejandro Rescia.
The channels for achieving balance
The balance between economic development and environmental conservation is one of the greatest challenges of our time. To achieve this, we need to make sensible adjustment between the three pillars of sustainability: social, economic and environmental: “These pillars must be structured hierarchically. In other words, the basis must always be the biological component of the planet. This provides support to the society that uses natural resources as per a specific economic system that administers them. This is the logical order; so on a global scale, society as a whole will be affected by the way resources are appropriated (sustainably or unsustainably) and by the impacts deriving from this appropriation (biophysical degradation, waste, pollution),” stated the expert.
Reducing the environmental impact of human activity through the implementation of preventive measures is essential to minimizing the damage caused. This includes the adoption of clean technologies, the restoration of degraded habitats and the creation of ecological brokers that connect fragmented natural areas.
From an industry perspective, many regions and industries are making progress in integrating sustainable practices to ensure that economic development and environmental conservation go hand in hand. At the European level, there are important frameworks such as the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)U, which sets out the guidelines for fighting climate change, protecting natural resources and strengthening biodiversity through responsible management of inputs such as pesticides, fertilizers, herbicides and irrigation. Farmers who use these methods receive financial subsidies. In addition to this support, both people and society as a whole will benefit in terms of well-being and health.
Other industries, such as mining, are beginning to see the impact of regulations that require land to be restored after commercial exploitation has ceased. “I think it’s important to have regulation related to ecological restoration and species conservation affected by human activity in place. If an activity is considered to be inevitable or cannot be carried out without causing an environmental impact, such regulations represent useful compensatory and corrective measures. In any case, it’s always more reasonable to take preventive measures to minimize or mitigate the environmental impact of activity,” concludes Rescia.
ARTICLE COLLABORATORS:
Alejandro Rescia Perazzo has a PhD in Biological Sciences and is a researcher and professor in the Department of Biodiversity, Ecology and Evolution, a Teaching Unit in Ecology at the Complutense University of Madrid (UCM) and a Biodiversity and Environment Advisor to the Vice Rector of Technology and Sustainability at UCM. He has worked on research topics related to biodiversity conservation, rural and cultural tourism, socio-ecological and the spatial resilience of cultural landscapes, participating in more than 20 projects in Spain, Argentina and the Antarctic continent. He has more than 60 publication credits, including articles, books and contributions. He teaches at degree and master’s level and has delivered international postgraduate courses in Argentina, Colombia, Mexico and Brazil.
