A Ban on Biodiversity?

Despite being the voice of the world's flora and fauna, will the delegates at the 10th meeting of the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity actually bring real change? David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Biodiversity. The word can't help but fail to do justice to the myriad species of plants and animals, the fecundity of the natural world, the complex web of life. As a word, it’s easy to ignore.

But inattention equals extinction. Earth is experiencing its sixth mass extinction event, species winking out of existence before we even know them. And it is a mass extinction entirely caused by the relentless expansion of human habitat and agriculture, as well as human domination of the natural systems—such as the climate—that make life possible.

The Convention on Biological Diversity of the United Nations is the voice of the world’s flora and fauna. Meeting now in Nagoya, jaded government officials and well-intentioned environmentalists natter on but nothing ever seems to come of these negotiations, despite the long list of signatures on said convention.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That's because economic growth and human welfare must trump environmental stasis and ecosystem welfare. But it is not jobs or the environment. It is human wellbeing and biodiversity. Without the clean water, pollination and endless array of other services provided to humanity—for free—by our fellow denizens of the planet, our economy will not just stall, it will stop. Then who will save us, the whales?

—David Biello

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe