30.08.2024
(Bio-)Diverse towards the objectives
Dear readers,
«Biodiversity encompasses the variety of all living things, including genes, plant varieties, animal species and breeds, ultimately the entire range of all ecosystems», said Felix Herzog, head of the Agricultural Landscape and Biodiversity Research Group of Agroscope, at a talk held recently by swiss-food. «Variety», he continued, «supports a multitude of interactions. High biodiversity increases the resilience of ecosystems to disturbances. And it benefits agriculture, too.»
But every form of agriculture negatively impacts biodiversity. We cultivate nature to grow food. However, every home that is built, every road, every sports ground, and every swimming pool likewise impacts nature. Humans are disrupting biodiversity. Many suffer from a guilty conscience, but acting out of guilt can be misguided.
For example, the belief that organic products promote biodiversity has become widespread. But it is an illusion. Organic farming also has a negative impact on the natural environment. Two arguments against organic farming include its lower productivity and higher land requirement. British and German studies have both concluded that the larger area of land required for organic farming means it has a greater impact on biodiversity than intensive farming on smaller plots. And the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) writes in its 2019 report «Farming without plant protection products» : «Land use for agriculture is inevitably related to loss of biodiversity. Management techniques such as use of Plant Protection Products have by definition a negative impact on biodiversity, but this loss is by far surpassed by the higher land use in extensive production systems.»
The fact is, agricultural production requires space. In Switzerland, cropland accounts for about one-third of the country’s total area. Farming benefits from biodiversity. Many crops depend on pollination. Consider rapeseed fields: They serve as a source of food for bees and, in return, farmers gain pollination services and honey. The Swiss agriculture has done its homework to a large extent in promoting biodiversity. In recent years, the percentage of wild flowering strips and strips for beneficial insects has increased to 19 percent of total farmland. The industry is working on not only the area of cropland, but also the quality of cropland, through numerous industry initiatives and good practice exchange forums, as explained in the swiss-food talk mentioned above.
«Quality over quantity» and impact assessment are essential. The somewhat simplified methods we see today for promoting biodiversity undoubtedly leave room for further improvement. And that applies even to urban hipster beekeepers. Honeybee farming has spread like wildfire in recent years. But honeybees are like the «cows of the air.» The number of urban honeybee colonies tripled from 2012 to 2018. A study by the Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL) shows that hobby beekeeping is not sustainable. It endangers biodiversity in urban areas because the honeybee is increasingly displacing wild insects.
Some wild bees feed on very specific plant species, while the honeybee is relatively nonspecific, visiting all flowering plants that offer nectar and pollen. Put simply, people who believe that honeybees promote biodiversity in urban areas have the wrong end of the stick. In fact, the opposite is true: To increase biodiversity in urban areas, the number of honeybees should be limited and a more diverse food supply provided for pollinators. The demand for more diverse green spaces in urban areas is a welcome change, particularly since plants also mitigate high temperatures in summer.
The beekeeping boom in urban areas shows how a one-sided understanding of how to promote biodiversity misses the mark. Supposedly good is not good. By the same token, this example also demonstrates that urban dwellers and homeowners share the responsibility for biodiversity. The Aargau Committee of the Biodiversity Initiative, for instance, focuses mainly on residential areas. The Aargauer Zeitung newspaper outlines the committee’s demands in an article entitled: «We have to get rid of all the asphalt.»
The Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), in its Report on the Status of Biodiversity in Switzerland, places a large share of the responsibility for biodiversity on people living in urban areas: «Biodiversity in urban areas is restricted by soil sealing, substance discharge, light emissions, biocides, crop protection products, and overly manicured and non-diverse private yards and public spaces.» Advancements in upgrading green spaces are offset by increased soil sealing. «Over the last 20 years, numerous green spaces in Swiss cities have been upgraded or newly established with the support of government, but at the same time many green spaces have been sealed. As a result of denser construction, but also the trend towards supposedly low-maintenance spaces, the degree of sealing in the residential area continued to increase.»
«Cat owners are also coming under biodiversity pressure.» They endanger biodiversity because their little darlings hunt birds and slowworms. What good are skylark plots in farm fields when the cat next door devours ground-nesting birds? According to a study in Nature Communications, 17% of animal species killed by cats are endangered. The Swiss Climate Protection Association (Verein Klimaschutz Schweiz) has discovered the cat issue for itself and is threatening to launch a referendum. They are demanding a «moratorium on cats», because cats, with their predatory instincts, kill birds, reptiles, and amphibians. In addition, the production of cat food generates harmful emissions.
In promoting biodiversity, government agencies are also increasingly targeting private individuals. They are issuing more and more regulations on what people are permitted to plant in their yards. In the Canton of Solothurn, for instance, rock gardens have been banned and further cantons are discussing taking similar action. The sale of crop protection products to private persons is to be substantially restricted. The Aargauer Zeitung newspaper recently published an article entitled «The government in my garden», which lists the numerous bans and restrictions. Non-native plants, like the popular cherry laurel or windmill palm, will no longer be permitted for sale in Switzerland as of September 2024. We all share the responsibility, whether we’re buying plants or combating. In greater Basel, there is a ban on watering green spaces in some areas to control the Japanese beetle.
The question arises, in view of all of these actions, as to where we draw the line between «good» and «bad» new organisms in a system as dynamic as biodiversity? And is there a clear «baseline» against which changes in biodiversity can be measured – locally and globally?
Discussions of this kind are valuable because they raise awareness and sensitize people to the underlying commonalities. Connections and networking are especially important in the field of biodiversity, because species need to be able to circulate.
Biodiversity is the basis of life, a source of innovation and a service provider. Systemic thinking is as important as developing a «functioning ecological infrastructure», as the farmer’s newspaper Zürcher Bauer writes in an editorial. In addition to networking biodiversity areas, we need to network the stakeholders and their various action programs.
Wild growth makes up biodiversity, but wild growth in measures without measuring the effect achieved inhibits the promotion of biodiversity. Moreover, it is not enough to target only one root cause or one stakeholder. If you point a finger at someone else, you have three fingers pointing back at yourself. Biodiversity matters, for all of us. It calls for a networked approach and a sense of personal responsibility.
John F. Kennedy coined one of the most famous quotes in the political history of the United States of America: «Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.» This sentence effectively captures the idea of personal responsibility and working for the greater good. When speaking of biodiversity, we are indeed also addressing the idea of a greater good. And perhaps Kennedy would say today: «Ask not what your country can do for biodiversity – ask what you can do for biodiversity.»
Actions that eventually have a big impact must start out small and local. Biodiversity needs (bio)diverse action programs that involve us all.
The swiss-food editorial team
