Do Mention the War: Why Conservation NGOs Must Speak Out on Biodiversity and Conflicts

Apr 11, 2022 | Henrike Schulte to Bühne
View Original

After the Aichi targets, which aimed to slow global biodiversity loss by 2020, were missed, conservation organisations turned their attention to the post-2020 biodiversity framework, which is due to be adopted by Parties to the Conservation on Biological Diversity (CBD) later this year. Notably, it will be the first global biodiversity framework to include a theory of change that shows explicit connections between actors, activities, and aims to create the conditions in which biodiversity can flourish.

Negative impacts of conflicts on biodiversity are common and complex, although not inevitable. Armed conflicts and insecurity can harm biodiversity through direct damage to ecosystems, such as from vehicle movements or pollution, or when the environment is weaponised, as was the case in the deliberate destruction of the Mesopotamian Marshes. In addition, conflicts can hamper biodiversity governance in many ways. For instance, organisations and government agencies that implement biodiversity projects may be forced to suspend project activities in areas affected by conflict or be hesitant to implement projects in such areas in the first place.  

Biodiversity can also be a key element of peacemaking and peacebuilding. Demilitarized zones, such as in Cyprus or on the Korean peninsula, can develop flourishing wildlife populations due to the absence of human activities, becoming geographical focal points for environmental peacebuilding efforts. Peace Parks, which are transboundary protected areas “dedicated to the promotion, celebration and/or commemoration of peace and cooperation”, can serve as avenues for increased cooperation among conflict actors.