SUBJECT: Biodiversity conservation and knowledge synthesis
AUTHOR: Jari Niemelä
DATE: 1st April

KEYWORDS: Biodiversity services, biodiversity maintenance, knowledge synthesis.

SUMMARY: The main biological resource we need to consider is biodiversity. Communication among researchers and (other) stakeholders is needed to synthesize the relevant knowledge.

The answer to the first question ‘what biological resources do we need to consider’ is ‘biodiversity’, i.e. all of them. Biodiversity encompasses all levels of biological organisation from genes to ecosystems. The concept is so broad that some writers feel that ‘biodiversity’ equals ‘nature’. Thus, an answer stating that biodiversity is the main biological resource to be considered gains general acceptance as it includes everybody’s pet organism or ecosystem. But why is it important to maintain the entire biological diversity? Because it is difficult (impossible?) to prioritise which one of the different organisational elements (structure, composition or function) and which organisational level of biodiversity is the important one (genes, species or ecosystems). Furthermore, the elements and levels are interlinked so that disruptions in one of them may cause cascading effects in others. This is another reason for maintaining all the parts of biodiversity.

Biodiversity is vital for humans. The benefits of biodiversity consist of structural and compositional biodiversity resources or ‘ecosystem goods’ (such as game species, timber, medicinal plants) and functional elements of biodiversity or ‘services’ (such as regulation of climate, carbon sequestration, decomposition, maintenance of hydrological cycles, pollination) (Christensen et al 1996). Again, it is impossible to rank these services because they are not directly comparable. Furthermore, links among them may cause indirect and unexpected effects.

Is it then a futile task to try to define the main biological resources? Perhaps it is. Maybe it is useful to define biodiversity (including structure, composition and function) as the main biological resource and focus on its maintenance. The innovation of the biodiversity concept is the realisation that, by definition, it is not only a ‘target’ in nature but also an inherent property of nature (Haila & Kouki 1994). This means that biodiversity cannot be maintained just by setting aside protected areas as museums. Biodiversity is everywhere and it has to be protected or maintained everywhere all the time. Nature can only provide services if its structure and composition are maintained. Thus, by maintaining biodiversity we make sure that it keeps providing its vital services to maintain itself and the humankind (as part of biodiversity).

The second question of the theme is ‘how do we synthesize our knowledge to better understand the risks associated with our dependency on biodiversity?’ There is a considerable amount of knowledge available about the structural and compositional aspects of biodiversity. There is less information about the functional elements, and especially about the relationship between structure/composition and function. However, even here, recent compilations and ongoing research will increase our understanding. I see two kinds of syntheses of knowledge: (1) synthesis of the scientific knowledge, and (2) synthesis of the societal applications of the knowledge. Ideally, these two processes of syntheses should go hand in hand, and I feel that fora including scientists and (other) stakeholders, such as EPBRS, are very useful for this joint work.

References

Christensen, N. L. and 12 co-authors. 1996. The report of the Ecological Society of America committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem management. Ecol. Appl. 6: 665-691.
Haila, Y. and Kouki, J. 1994. The phenomenon of biodiversity in conservation biology. Ann. Zool. Fennici 31:5-18.

A contribution by:

Jari Niemelä
University of Helsinki
P.O.BOX 65
FIN-00014