Natural world close to collapse

Link

In a news-day dominated by Donald Trump's tax return and the birth of the royal baby, it was also reported that the natural world was close to a state of collapse, and that this threatened the viability of human society.

With one or two exceptions, this somehow did not merit headline news.

This is aside from the devastation that climate change will bring. Current economic forecasts - which most everyone is doing their utmost to make a reality - is that human economic activity will double within the next couple of decades.
It is obviously not sustainable, and I submit that the reason that we're willing to turn a blind eye or that we attempt to play it down is because the horizon of our economic system doesn't extend beyond a few years. The next quarters results are more important than the fact that they will eventually destroy civilization.

In essence, capitalism is a suicide pact. Discuss.

I totally agree with everything you said except the last sentence.
Capitalism, communism, socialism, totalitarianism, etc. are just different versions of the same slow death - "name your poison" if you will.
"Civilization" itself was the beginning of the end for homo sapiens. Hey, we had a good run!

Global warming cannot be real because someone brought a snowball into congress proving that it snows in the winter. We also don't have to worry because all of melting ice caps will just make more water. In the end if we really fuck up I am sure god will give us a redo because I heard he does those things from a reliable guy named @Dayton3 . If there is one thing he knows it is god, and god will not let us die because he loves us all. Look around you and you can see how god has made this special place just for us where things are comfortable and easy.

Fake news. Stock market is great. Stupid libtards.

[/Conservatives]

It's The Guardian. Enough said

What would you suggest Rick? Whether your system is socialistic or capitalistic you can't expect several billion people to choose to be poor. And you can't reduce the world population radically short of a nuclear war which would harm the natural world far, far worse.

A radical transformation of the economy is required. There are proposals to that effect in the report. Perhaps you should read it.

Choosing business as usual is choosing for a very large proportion of humanity to be poor - or dead - before long.

you don't even realize what argument you (and The Guardian ) are making do you Rick? Basically you are making the argument that the United States should be exercising far, far, far more physical control of the world and its environment than it does now. Most of the areas of the world suffering worst from habitat loss and losses of biodiversity are areas OUTSIDE the control of the United States. I think there is little disagreement that if the U.S. controlled the Amazon River basin that it would be taken care of far better than it is now.

You and The Guardian are basically arguing in favor of the United States policing the world.

Nowhere is that argument made by anyone other than you. Do you understand that this report was not produced by The Guardian?

Or we could, you know, lead by example.

I heard about this yesterday. It seems the biggest culprit is agriculture. It says more than a third of the world's land, and three quarters of fresh water resources are devoted to crops and livestock.

Soldiers and weapons are immensely more persuasive than mere "examples".

And heeeeeere we go.

promoted by The Guardian. Same as. And I didn't say you or The Guardian sought to make that argument. For American world control. Yet it would be the most practical and easiest to implement approach. Not to mention reducing some of that overpopulation you guys seem all concerned about.

In the article Rick the following paragraph is about the only part policy wise in the entire thing.

Over the past week, representatives from the world’s governments have fine-tuned the summary for policymakers, which includes remedial scenarios, such as “transformative change” across all areas of government, revised trade rules, massive investments in forests and other green infrastructure, and changes in individual behaviour such as lower consumption of meat and material goods.

As you can see and would probably admit, it is extremely vague. And I'm uncertain how you can implement "changes in individual behavior such as lower consumption of meat and material goods" short of the use of coercion (force).

Once again - have you read the relevant section of the report or are you going to continue to troll by conflating it with The Guardian article about it, and trying to twist it into a reason to start more wars?

Here is the summary - just a summary - and it is anything but vague. The suggested policy changes are from Page 27 onwards.

If you wanted the report discussed then why didn't you link to the report in the first place? Here are some pages from the summary that you linked to. Still seems awfully vague to me.

Figure 9. Transformative change in global sustainability pathways. Collaborative implementation of priority governance interventions (levers) targeting key points of intervention (leverage points) could enable transformative change from current trends towards more sustainable ones. Most levers can be applied by a range of actors such as intergovernmental organizations, governments, non-governmental organizations, citizen and community groups, indigenous peoples and local communities, donor agencies, science and educational organizations, and the private sector, at multiple leverage points, depending on context. Implementing existing and new instruments through place-based governance interventions that are integrative, informed, inclusive and adaptive, using strategic policy mixes and learning from feedback, could enable global transformation.
32. The synthesis of evidence for key constituents of pathways to sustainability suggests a group of five overarching types of management interventions, or levers, and eight leverage points for transformative change (Figure SPM.9; D3 and D4 above) {5.4.1, 5.4.2}. The notion of levers and leverage points recognizes that complex global systems cannot be managed simply, but that in certain cases, specific interventions can be mutually reinforcing and generate larger-scale changes towards achieving shared goals (well established) (Table SPM.1). For example, changes in laws and policies can enable and underpin changes in resource management and consumption and, in turn, changes in individual and collective behaviour and habits can facilitate the implementation of policies and laws {5.4.3}. 33. Changes towards sustainable production and consumption and reducing and transforming residues and waste, particularly changes in consumption among the affluent, is recognized by some individuals and communities worldwide as central to sustainable development and reducing inequalities. While actual reductions have been limited, actions already being taken at different levels can be improved, coordinated and scaled up (well established). Those include, inter alia, introducing and improving standards and systems, including relevant regulations, aimed at internalizing the external costs of production, extraction and consumption (such as pricing wasteful or polluting practices, including through penalties), promoting resource efficiency, circular and other economic models, voluntary environmental and social certification of market chains and incentives for sustainable practices and innovation.
ADVANCE UNEDITED
29
Importantly, they also involve a change in the definition of what a good quality of life entails – decoupling the idea of a good and meaningful life from ever-increasing material consumption. All those approaches are more effective when they are mutually reinforcing. Actions that help to unleash, voluntarily, existing social values of responsibility in the form of individual, collective and organizational actions towards sustainability can have a powerful and lasting effect in shifting behaviour and cultivating stewardship as a normal social practice (established but incomplete) {5.4.1.2, 5.4.1.3, 6.4.2, 6.4.3}. 34. Expanding and effectively managing the current network of protected areas, including terrestrial, freshwater and marine areas, is important for safeguarding biodiversity (well established), particularly in the context of climate change. Conservation outcomes also depend on adaptive governance, strong societal engagement, effective and equitable benefit-sharing mechanisms, sustained funding, and monitoring and enforcement of rules (well established) {6.2, 5.4.2}. National Governments play a central role in supporting primary research and effective conservation and sustainable use of multi-functional landscape and seascape. The latter include planning ecologically representative networks of interconnected protected areas to cover key biodiversity areas and managing trade-offs between societal objectives that represent diverse worldviews and multiple values of nature (established but incomplete) {6.3.2.3, 6.3.3.3}. Safeguarding protected areas into the future also entails enhancing monitoring and enforcement systems, managing biodiversity-rich land and sea beyond protected areas, addressing property rights conflicts and protecting environmental legal frameworks against the pressure of powerful interest groups. In many areas, conservation depends on building capacity and enhancing stakeholder collaboration, involving non-profit groups as well as indigenous peoples and local communities to establish and manage Marine Protected Area’s and Marine Protected Area networks, and proactively using instruments such as landscape-scale and seascape-scale participatory scenarios and spatial planning, including transboundary conservation planning (well established) {5.3.2.3, 6.3.2.3, 6.3.3.3}. Implementation beyond protected areas includes combating wildlife and timber trafficking through effective enforcement and ensuring the legality and sustainability of trade in wildlife. Such actions include prioritizing wildlife trafficking in criminal justice systems, using community-based social marketing to reduce demand and implementing strong measures to combat corruption at all levels (established but incomplete) {6.3.2.3}. 35. Integrated landscape governance entails a mix of policies and instruments that together ensure nature conservation, ecological restoration and sustainable use, and sustainable production (including of food, materials and energy), sustainable forest management and infrastructure planning, and address the major drivers of biodiversity loss and nature deterioration (well established) {6.3.2, 6.3.6}. Policy mixes harmonized across sectors, levels of governance and jurisdictions can account for ecological and social differences across and beyond the landscape, build on existing forms of knowledge and governance and address trade-offs between tangible and non-tangible benefits in a transparent and equitable manner (established but incomplete). Managing landscapes sustainably can be better achieved through multifunctional, multi-use, multistakeholder and community-based approaches (well established), using a combination of measures and practices, including: (a) well managed and connected protected areas and other effective area based conservation measures; (b) reduced impact logging; forest certification; payment for ecosystem services, among other instruments and reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation; (c) support for ecological restoration; (d) effective monitoring including public access and participation as appropriate; (e) addressing of illegal activities; and (f) effective implementation of multilateral environmental agreements and other relevant international agreements by their parties; and (g) promoting sustainable biodiversity based food systems. (well established) {6.3.2.1, 6.3.2.3, 6.3.2, 6.3.2.4}. 36. Feeding the world in a sustainable manner, especially in the context of climate change and population growth, entails food systems that ensure adaptive capacity, minimize environmental impacts, eliminate hunger, and contribute to human health and animal welfare (established but incomplete) {5.3.2.1, 6.3.2.1}. Pathways to sustainable food systems entail land use planning and sustainable management of both the supply/producer and the demand/consumer sides of food systems (well established) {5.3.2.1, 6.3.2.1, 6.4}. Options for sustainable agricultural production are available and developing further, with some having more impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem functions than others {6.3.2.1}. These options include integrated pest and nutrient management, organic agriculture, agroecological practices, soil and water conservation practices, conservation agriculture, agroforestry, silvopastoral systems, irrigation management, small or patch systems, and practices to improve animal welfare. These practices could be enhanced through well-structured regulations, incentives and subsidies, the removal of distorting subsidies {2.3.5.2, 5.3.2.1, 5.4.2.1, 6.3.2}, and--at landscape scales--by integrated landscape planning
ADVANCE UNEDITED
30
and watershed management. Ensuring the adaptive capacity of food production incorporates measures that conserve the diversity of genes, varieties, cultivars, breeds, landraces and species which also contribute to diversified, healthy and culturally-relevant nutrition. Some incentives and regulations may contribute to positive changes at both the production and consumption ends of supply chains, such as the creation, improvement and implementation of voluntary standards, certification and supply-chain agreements (e.g., the Soy Moratorium) and the reduction of harmful subsidies. Regulatory mechanisms could also address the risks of co-option and lobbying, where commercial or sectoral interests may work to maintain high levels of demand, monopolies and continued use of pesticides and chemical inputs {5.3.2.1}. Non-regulatory alternatives are also important and potentially include technical assistance--especially for small-holders—and appropriate economic incentive programs for example, some payment for ecosystem services programmes and other nonmonetary instruments {5.4.2.1}. Options that address and engage other actors in food systems (including the public sector, civil society and consumers, grassroot movements) include participatory on-farm research, promotion of low-impact and healthy diets and localization of food systems. Such options could help reduce food waste, overconsumption, and demand for animal products from unsustainable production, which could have synergistic benefits for human health (established but incomplete) {5.3.2.1, 6.3.2.1}. 37. Ensuring sustainable food production from the oceans while protecting biodiversity entails policy action to apply sustainable ecosystem approaches to fisheries management, spatial planning (including the implementation and expansion of marine protected areas) and, more broadly, to address drivers such as climate change, pollution (well established) {5.3.2.5, 6.3.3}. Scenarios show that pathways to sustainable fisheries entail conserving, restoring and sustainably using marine ecosystems, rebuilding overfished stocks (including through targeted limits on catch or fishing efforts and moratoria), reducing pollution (including plastics), managing destructive extractive activities, eliminating harmful subsidies and illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, adapting fisheries management to climate change impacts and reducing the environmental impact of aquaculture (well established) {4, 5.3.2.5, 6.3.3.3.2}. Marine protected areas have demonstrated success in both biodiversity conservation and improved local quality of life when managed effectively and can be further expanded through larger or more interconnected protected areas or new protected areas in currently under-represented regions and key biodiversity areas (established but incomplete) {5.3.2.5; 6.3.3.3.1}. Due to major pressures on coasts (including development, land reclamation and water pollution), implementing marine conservation outside protected areas, such as integrated coastal planning, is important for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use (well established) {6.3.3.3}. Other measures to expand multi-sectoral cooperation on coastal management include corporate social responsibility measures, standards for building and construction and eco-labelling (well established) {6.3.3.3.2, 6.3.3.3.4}. Additional tools could include economic instruments for financing conservation both non-market and market based, including for example payment for ecosystem services, biodiversity offset schemes, blue-carbon sequestration, cap-and-trade programmes, green bonds and trust funds and new legal instruments such as the proposed international legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (established but incomplete) {6.3.3.2, 6.3.3.1.3, 5.4.2.1, 5.4.1.7}. 38. Sustaining freshwater in the context of climate change, rising demand for water extraction and increased levels of pollution involves both cross-sectoral and sector-specific interventions that improve water use efficiency, increase storage, reduce sources of pollution, improve water quality and minimize disruption and foster restoration of natural habitats and flow regimes (well established) {6.3.4}. Promising interventions include practising integrated water resource management and landscape planning across scales; protecting wetland biodiversity areas; guiding and limiting the expansion of unsustainable agriculture and mining; slowing and reversing de-vegetation of catchments; and mainstreaming practices that reduce erosion, sedimentation and pollution run-off and minimize the negative impact of dams (well established) {6.3.4.6}. Sector-specific interventions include improved water-use efficiency techniques (including in agriculture, mining and energy), decentralized (for example, household-based) rainwater collection, integrated management (e.g., ‘conjunctive use’) of surface and groundwater, locally developed water conservation techniques and water pricing and incentive programmes (such as water accounts and payment for ecosystem services programmes) {6.3.4.2, 6.3.4.4}. With regard to watershed payment for ecosystem services programmes, their effectiveness and efficiency can be enhanced by acknowledging multiple values in their design, implementation and evaluation and setting up impact evaluation systems (established but incomplete) {6.3.4.4}. Investment in infrastructure, including green infrastructure, is important, especially in developing countries, but it can be undertaken in a way that takes into account ecological function and the careful blending of built and natural infrastructure {5.3.2.4, 6.3.4.5}.

So @RickDeckard, I'm "dumb" for posting a copy of a few pages of the report YOU linked to?

Poor or dead, which would you prefer? This isn't just a case of arguing about the merits of economic systems, it's a case of arguing in favour of actually having a human around which can have the argument.

What makes you think that?

Even a complete ecological collapse would not mean the end of humans.

Absolutely. Dumb and a troll, since you are making no substantial effort to engage with the topic. This will be my last reply to you on the matter. But if you continue, moderators will presumably have to decide whether to split your bullshit into a seperate thread.

We could purge the donkey fucking states.

It is just captain obvious doing his thing. You just generally have a big old dunce hat on your head.

Where will you live then? You are from the south which I presume you are referring to.

Beware, that thought crosses over into the inherently evil category. It would make Jesus cry, but old testament dickhead god would probably love it,

I am from NY you dipshit. I have lived in the south for many years now.

I'm not "engaging with the topic"? I'm the one who has actually copied and pasted parts of the report summary that you couldn't trouble yourself to do. If anyone is trolling with this thread it's you.

So where do you plan to move to? And some people (including you IIRC) have slammed me for living in Arkansas. But you've lived in the south for "many years now" by your own admission.

The south can't be that bad as it apparently is good enough for you to stay here.