IPCC For Bio-Diversity Gets Official UN Go-Ahead.

The United Nations has announced that the international body to prevent “bio-diversity loss” has passed it’s final hurdle and has been given approval as an international body to coordinate all laws to protect bio-diversity.

The Intergovernmental Science Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Service (IPBES) is designed to mirror the IPCC and produce reports and recommendations on how to protect the diversity of life, which is allegedly being lost throughout the world.

The UN made the announcement in a press release on its wesbite, just before Christmas holidays:

21 December 2010 – A new international body aimed at reversing the unprecedented loss of species and ecosystems vital to life on Earth due to human activity has passed its final hurdle with approval by the United Nations General Assembly.

In a resolution adopted by consensus, the Assembly yesterday called on the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) to take the necessary steps to set up the Intergovernmental Science Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the final approval needed for the body for which the groundwork had been laid at UNEP-sponsored meetings earlier this year.

“IPBES represents a major breakthrough in terms of organizing a global response to the loss of living organisms and forests, freshwaters, coral reefs and other ecosystems that underpin all life, including economic life, on Earth,” UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said today.

UN News Centre. UN Authorizes New Body to Stem Loss of Ecosystems Vital to Life.

Mirroring the IPCC the new body aimed to examine what the UN called “transformational policy options” to “bring about real change”:

IPBES, which in many ways mirrors the UN-backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that has helped to catalyze government action on global warming, will foster the search for government action needed to reverse the accelerating degradation of the natural world and its species, which some experts put at 1,000 times the natural progression.

Its role includes high-quality peer reviews of the wealth of science on the issue from research institutes across the globe and outlining transformational policy options to bring about real change.

What exactly does “outlining transformational policy options to bring about real change” mean in English? Your guess is as good as mine. But it will involve large amounts of money. Your money:

It said an annual $45 billion investment into protected areas alone could secure delivery of ecosystem services worth some $5 trillion a year.

So what’s the next step for this new IPCC-type body?

UNEP, as the interim Secretariat of the new independent body, will now organize a plenary or meeting of Governments in 2011, the first year of the International Decade of Biodiversity, to decide which country will house the IPBES and which institutions will host it along with other institutional arrangements.

We’re in safe hands.

———————————————————

Barry, in the comments below, has pointed out that their claims of biodiversity loss seem similarly based on modelling and guess-work, rather than empirical science and observation. He’s right – it is.

Most of the estimates of species loss are based on the work of two academics, Norman Myers and E.O. Wilson. It won’t surprise readers to learn that both are strong believers in neo-Malthusianism and both rely very heavily on modelling. Myers himself says that he relied on “heroic extrapolation” for his work on biodiversity loss.

Wilson’s pet theory is “sociobiology” – I’m sure you can figure out what that actually means in practice. In the 1960s Wilson was the target of protests from the International Committee Against Racism who chanted “Racist Wilson you can’t hide, we charge you with genocide” at one of his speeches on sociobiology.

For an excellent, in-depth article which explains the faulty maths behind extrapolations of species loss, see Stephen’s Budiansky’s excellent “Liberal Curmudgeon” blog here and a superb follow-up article here.

8 responses to “IPCC For Bio-Diversity Gets Official UN Go-Ahead.

  1. The UN is right to be concerned about an unprecedented loss of bio-diversity. The climate-change delta of circa 0.7c /- 0.7c since 1850 has been responsible for countless deaths. True some may have died from old age, others from disease and wars but it is clear that too many have joined the choir eternal prematurely.
    Sadly, the UN survives unchallenged to become an Enron wet-dream of things to come.
    They claim to worship bio-diversity, they turn food into Bali-coupons. They scream for Justice while justifying the slaughter of little African Girls and Boys with a tutting disapproval at the DDT that would have saved them by elevating
    the opinion of a well intentioned but murderous zealot into considered and educated science.
    Thanks Ms C and all those who felt that young humans were well worth sacrificing.
    If the Malaria doesn’t kill them, the lack of food availability and habitat loss will happily take up the slack.
    Loss of Bio-diversity, for sure, that is happening and will get worse but it’s the UN and Government actions that’s making it worse.
    Don’t you dare steal our money, call us Holocaust deniers as you rob us and then claim that the blood on your hands is our fault.
    Bastards.

  2. The carbon credits and trading seems to be creaking to a halt. Got to find something else to fill so many pockets and bank accounts!

    The aims of the biodiversity rubbish is to give NGOs and advocacy groups a green light to effectively squat on public land in return for permission to extort money from the existing population who rely on that land for their existence. Governments will get the benefit of natural resources being managed without having to pay for that expertise or sell the public land. The squatters will get the benefit of a much improved income without ever needing to buy the land. The public will be required to stump up the readies. As usual.

    On the issue of actual biodiversity I get the impression the science behind it is as fudged as climate science – generally the advocates of this problem insist that if you reduce the size of a particular habitat you reduce the numbers of species it can support. That doesn’t sound intuitive to me. Each species will have carved out a niche and have a place in the food chain. Reduce the size of the habitat and you’d surely reduce the population numbers of each species not the numbers of species.

  3. Around here, biodiversity translates into no dams, as well as tens of millions to pay a few guys who insist in saving species that refuse to cooperate with them and insist in going extinct (nobody misses them, I regret to say.)

  4. Why did humans evolve the ability to laugh? (If we really do have a money problem, and I think we do, than it seems prudent to begin cutting expenses on worthless, mindless, idiotic nonsense like the United Nations and every little International Anything there is. Really! And FAST!!!)

  5. IPBES, the stuff Harrabinian and Beeboidist wet dreams are made of. In fact I’m surprised they haven’t managed to drown themselves.

    hantingthelibrary is an excellent blog and richly deserves its spreading fame.

  6. See Where Are The Corpses? It deals with Wilson and species ‘loss’.

  7. Pingback: Beware of the new Marketing/Branding campaign « Newsbeat1

  8. ”  A new international body aimed at reversing the unprecedented loss of species and ecosystems vital to life on Earth due to human activity has ….”
    About time!
    Can’t wait for the UN to hold Eco-crime trials and punish those who obstructed the use of DDT and sentenced to death millions of third-world children.
    And bird-choppers, famine-fuellers, hypothermia-helpers, brush-fire arsonists…..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s