lower the environmental pressure addressed. It often remains unclear though what
the odds are for such suggestions to be turned into reality and to show a globally
relevant effect at the end. Economic power is one of the prime enabling and limiting
factors for governmental environmental protection to directly finance management
of the environment or to finance means of education, research and awareness which
are fundamental to realize the environmental impact of human behaviour and, where
necessary, to alter it on an individual as well as on a collective level.
The economic framework of our globalized world may—at least sometimes—be
accounted for, when discussing the environmental effects of economic behaviour,
but is usually neglected when working out possible solutions to alter these effects.
The more generalized action is demanded, the less clear it is who has to act to which
degree to reach a postulated goal.
Vlek and Steg (2007:14) for example stated: “To ensure environmental security
and sustainability, the overall policy goal certainly must be to reverse the trend of
gradual environmental deterioration, locally as well as globally. Some key aspirations are: (1) safeguarding the availability of basic resources, (2) protecting human
health from environmentally risky conditions, (3) ensuring sufficient quality of
human living environments, (4) protecting natural areas with their wildlife, and
(5) promoting greater harmony between humanity and (other) nature.” There is no
question that these are worthwhile goals. But which actor is addressed in which
way? Who has perhaps already taken the first steps in the right direction? Who
might easily contribute far more effort? And who is capable of acting in the
proposed way at all?
We therefore took a closer look on the relation between the economic condition of
the countries around the globe and the conditions of their biodiversity. Is there a
direct link between the both and if yes, what does it look like? Since the economic
status of a country and the status of its environmental condition are multilayered
phenomena that cannot be measured easily as a whole, we focus on the question
whether there is a link between the economic power and the extent of country-related
biodiversity and endangerment.
It is already known that “basic material conditions (. . .) as population, economic
production, urbanization, and geographical factors (. . .) affect the environment”
(York et al. 2003: 279), that economic growth is a threat to ecosystems (AsafuAdjaye 2003; Hoffmann 2004; Mikkelson 2013) and it is assumed that biodiversity
loss increases with higher inequality, when controlled for basic material conditions
(Mikkelson et al. 2007). Thus, something has to change if biodiversity should be
protected in a long-term perspective. But who is in duty to act? And who is capable
of acting at all? To what degree can global biodiversity loss actually be tackled under
the current circumstances of a globalized world?
With this contribution we analyse the relationship between the economic power
of a country, the natural species richness, endemism and the endangerment of native
biota. Furthermore, we try to find out which combinations of economic power and
pressure to nature are realized, and where the potential to act might be highest.
Economy on Top, Nature on the Brink? A Closer Look on the Relationship Between. . .
199
the odds are for such suggestions to be turned into reality and to show a globally
relevant effect at the end. Economic power is one of the prime enabling and limiting
factors for governmental environmental protection to directly finance management
of the environment or to finance means of education, research and awareness which
are fundamental to realize the environmental impact of human behaviour and, where
necessary, to alter it on an individual as well as on a collective level.
The economic framework of our globalized world may—at least sometimes—be
accounted for, when discussing the environmental effects of economic behaviour,
but is usually neglected when working out possible solutions to alter these effects.
The more generalized action is demanded, the less clear it is who has to act to which
degree to reach a postulated goal.
Vlek and Steg (2007:14) for example stated: “To ensure environmental security
and sustainability, the overall policy goal certainly must be to reverse the trend of
gradual environmental deterioration, locally as well as globally. Some key aspirations are: (1) safeguarding the availability of basic resources, (2) protecting human
health from environmentally risky conditions, (3) ensuring sufficient quality of
human living environments, (4) protecting natural areas with their wildlife, and
(5) promoting greater harmony between humanity and (other) nature.” There is no
question that these are worthwhile goals. But which actor is addressed in which
way? Who has perhaps already taken the first steps in the right direction? Who
might easily contribute far more effort? And who is capable of acting in the
proposed way at all?
We therefore took a closer look on the relation between the economic condition of
the countries around the globe and the conditions of their biodiversity. Is there a
direct link between the both and if yes, what does it look like? Since the economic
status of a country and the status of its environmental condition are multilayered
phenomena that cannot be measured easily as a whole, we focus on the question
whether there is a link between the economic power and the extent of country-related
biodiversity and endangerment.
It is already known that “basic material conditions (. . .) as population, economic
production, urbanization, and geographical factors (. . .) affect the environment”
(York et al. 2003: 279), that economic growth is a threat to ecosystems (AsafuAdjaye 2003; Hoffmann 2004; Mikkelson 2013) and it is assumed that biodiversity
loss increases with higher inequality, when controlled for basic material conditions
(Mikkelson et al. 2007). Thus, something has to change if biodiversity should be
protected in a long-term perspective. But who is in duty to act? And who is capable
of acting at all? To what degree can global biodiversity loss actually be tackled under
the current circumstances of a globalized world?
With this contribution we analyse the relationship between the economic power
of a country, the natural species richness, endemism and the endangerment of native
biota. Furthermore, we try to find out which combinations of economic power and
pressure to nature are realized, and where the potential to act might be highest.
Economy on Top, Nature on the Brink? A Closer Look on the Relationship Between. . .
199