With this success had only expected a few: the UN Summit in Nagoya has adopted an ambitious conservation program to strengthen the developing countries. The conservationists creating the leap from niche - and rightly claim to rewrite the rules of business. A commentary by Spiegel Online .
Nature conservation summit of Nagoya has a message that applies not only to bird lovers and hikers forest - but also all other people. Just who lives in a city receives from the meeting of the United Nations sent a message: Our lives depend existentially dependent on the diversity of nature. We are for what we get now for free continue to pay if we do not want to lose the foundation of this life.
Who bites the morning in the heart of Berlin, Munich or Hamburg in its rolls, is associated with the field from which it comes. But as long as the soil is still fertile? If you open the paper occurs in connection with the forest, which comes from the paper. But there are enough forests in the future? Who drinks a cup of coffee which obtained a stimulus from subtropical mountain areas. What happens to the rain forest around the plantation, without which the coffee trees are less fertile?
The list of objectives that were adopted at the summit in Japan is long and amazing: By 2020, over-fishing is stopped, the sustainable agriculture and the extinction of species be stopped. If the naive wishes of the dreamer? In view of the failure to achieve the UN goals set for 2010, one might wonder how meaningful such statements are general. But this can only mean strengthening the role of the UN environmentalist in world politics and to elevate the United Nations Environment Programme to the rank of a genuine UN organization. When world trade in the WTO is already the case.
We have become accustomed to have eroded fields, edible oils to be obtained from tropical deforestation areas, fish from illegal sources essen. Alles soll möglichst billig sein. Zugleich erwarten wir von den ärmeren Menschen in Entwicklungsländern, dass sie nicht so viele Ressourcen verbrauchen wie wir, weil das der Planet nicht verkraften würde. Nun weist der Gipfel von Nagoya einen Weg, wie es anders laufen kann. Bei Uno-Gipfeln ist grundsätzlich Skepsis angebracht, wie viel sie von dem einlösen, was Satz für Satz erkämpft wurde, sobald die Unterhändler in ihre Flugzeuge nach Hause gestiegen sind.
Doch zum Erfolg von Nagoya gehört auch, dass sich dort Manager von vielen etablierten Firmen und Großkonzernen eingefunden haben, die offen sind für jenes neue Denken, das aus den Dokumenten spricht: Regenwälder, Korallenriffe, Oceans, grasslands and farmlands are therefore living in future tense, the actual central banks in our economy. That we can see them fresh air, food, medicines, drinking water and much more is long gone, of course.
The economy of nature at the center. Because our global air conditioners, water coolers and pantries work permanently only if their native diversity can thrive on living things. And that's only if people who live near them, can feed on something other than destruction and overexploitation. The economic rules of today make it profitable to exploit the planet. The noble objectives of conservation summit von Nagoya setzt, sind ein Anfang, diese Spielregeln umzuschreiben.
Dazu gehört es vor allem, dass jene Menschen angemessen bezahlt werden müssen, die tragfähig wirtschaften statt nur kurzfristig, die etwa als Bauern in Deutschland Moorböden erhalten oder als Kaffeeunternehmer in Äthiopien dafür sorgen, dass der benachbarte Regenwald erhalten bleibt. Solche Menschen, nicht die ruchlosen Banker, haben Boni verdient. Das Geld der Gesellschaft ist bei ihnen deutlich besser angelegt, denn sie sind wirklich "systemrelevant". Diese Menschen dürften ruhig ein bisschen gieriger sein, denn ihre Arbeit trägt für alle Früchte, was sich von der Lehman-Bank oder Hypo Real Estate nicht sagen lässt.
Without natural diversity, everything is nothing, is the message of Nagoya. Economic growth, the natural diversity destroys, reduces the wealth instead of increasing it. No one has the debate of Heads of State and Minister more to the point when Andreas Carlgren, the Conservative environment minister of Sweden: "biodiversity the foundation of our economy and it can not be isolated for more from the rest of the economy seen," said he, " Economy and ecology are two sides of same coin. "
But we will have more money pulled out of pocket? The question asked by many when he hears that larger sums of money should flow from north to south to forests and protect coral reefs. But the question in the wrong direction. In Germany alone there are annual subsidies amounting to almost 50 billion euros, which directly harm the environment, from subsidized agricultural diesel to the commuters. The decision of Nagoya, to abolish such subsidies by 2020, promises, thus primarily an enormous relief to the taxpayers.
contrast, beneficiaries of the much smaller sums that are to flow into the nature, the deeper prosperity: healthier food, the maintenance of genetic treasuries and stable environment are goals that unfold directly promote and create future-proof jobs. That Western companies in future should pay for it when they use the natural resources of developing countries for their products is only logical. So far it is for tropical countries the most lucrative to sell off its forests, to clear them for timber and to sacrifice for agricultural land on which grows the food for European cattle. For too long the remaining rain forests were regarded as a free source of drugs or cosmetics. By the Nagoya Summit the last wilderness areas have now assigned an economic value that makes it attractive to get them. If developing countries in the long term to as yet unknown natural products earn, they will think it maybe twice, for the forest a one-off payment to clear-cut.
Such payments are therefore not the destruction of natural resources, but the continued use of. The expectations in Brazil or Indonesia, how much money you can earn along the way, may be exaggerated. In addition, it will surely soon be the first news that is driven here and there and loose with such payments. True, the principle remains forever. To whom should such transfers appear too expensive, consider the following: what would we say if Chinese or Brazilians by the resin or the Bavarian forest roamed to collect plants with which they earn a lot of money later? Certainly we would receive fair Share of the revenue claim.
The goal set in 2020 about 17 percent of the land area under protection also means that the man claimed 83 percent for its purposes. The 17 percent is the global recovery area, a development area for the hereditary nature of the planet, which has brought us. Equally crucial, however, is what happened to the 83 percent human world. Whether it's worth there, friendly economies in the long term or short-term commit-exploitation, is the deeper issue for the future of civilization.
The summit of Nagoya has not only avoided a second humiliation of the United Nations after the disaster of Copenhagen, but the man with an amazing Innovation faced: the nature breaks out of the narrow block of reserves and the pure frog counting. He seeks the path into the heart of the global economy and will prescribe their new principles. That is, given the forcefulness with which human beings change the world, overdue - not least to make it 2050 or 2100 is still there to count frogs and wetlands can provide us with fresh water.
Source: Christian Schwägerl, Nagoya, Spiegel Online
