un sito di notizie, fatto dai commentatori

Disperarsi per la perdita di biodiversità è un approccio sbagliato [EN]

0 commenti

A cura di @Billy Pilgrim.

Sul suo blog, Matt Ridley mette in guardia dal catastrofismo di chi ritiene che l’attività umana ed il progresso stia danneggiando la biodiversità, sostenendo che è proprio il progresso l’arma migliore per proteggere l’ambiente:

The idea that “western values”, or “capitalism” are the problem is wrong. On the whole what really diminishes biodiversity is a large but poor population trying to live off the land. As countries get richer and join the market economy they generally reverse deforestation, slow species loss and reverse some species declines. Countries like Bangladesh are now rich enough to be reforesting, not deforesting, and this is happening all over the world. Most of this is natural forest, not plantations. As for wildlife, think of all the species that have returned to abundance in Britain: otters, ospreys, sea eagles, kites, cranes, beavers, deer and more. Why are wolves increasing all around the world, lions decreasing and tigers now holding steady? Basically, because wolves are in rich countries, lions in poor countries and tigers in middle income countries. Prosperity is the solution not the problem.

Nothing would kill off nature faster than trying to live off it. When an African villager gets rich enough to buy food in a shop rather than seek bushmeat in the forest, that’s a win for wildlife. Ditto if he or she can afford gas for cooking rather than cutting wood. The more we can urbanise and the more we can increase our use of intensive farming and fossil fuels, the less we will need to clear forests for either food or fuel.

Immagine da pxhere.


Commenta qui sotto e segui le linee guida del sito.