opinionsubmit@hotmail.com STATI Matters David Suzuki, David Suzuki Foundation Anyone who regularly reads science journals knows there’s no shortage of research about how human activities are affecting our ecosys- tems. But translating that research into action to conserve those systems is another matter. Sometimes it seems there are dire predic- tions about the future of the planet’s ecosystems coming out almost every day. Then the head- lines fade (if there even were headlines) and so does the sense of urgency. As a recent editorial in the journal Na#wre points out, “In too many cases, however, that leaves scientists positioned only to track the loss of these systems. So far, researchers have been less effective at achieving the level of impact on policy decisions needed to implement actual conservation measures.” Standard appeals for conservation—such as the need to conserve species for future genera- tions, protect especially charismatic species, or protect the aesthetic beauty of certain areas- arguably aren’t doing very well. By most meas- urements, society is failing to conserve the diversity of life on Earth, as well as the natural systems that provide many important services to humanity—things like helping stabilize the cli- mate, clean our air and water, and keep our soils fertile. If standard appeals aren’t working, how do we best appeal to policy makers to make the changes necessary to achieve sustainability? Well, one way that is receiving increasing support is to stress the economic value of ecosystems. That may seem crass to some. After all, how can you put a dollar value on some services that are irre- placeable? How can you put a price tag on the planet’s ecosystems that support us when it’s the only planet we have? Those are valid questions, but if policy-mak- ers only understand dollars and cents, and natu- ral services are valued at zero, then they'll con- tinually be overused and damaged by those who make the economic decisions. Natural services are economically valuable, and when we reduce their capacity to function, we lose out—both in terms of dollars and quality of life. Research shows, for example, that the terrible loss of life and property resulting from the tsunami last year could have been lessened if mangrove forests along the Sri Lankan coast had been pro- tected. In Canada too, we rarely put a value on nature or the services it provides. In Ontario Banking on our natural capitat alone, smog costs are at least $1 billion every year in health care expenses and lost work- days—and that number is increasing. These are actual hard costs to society. Yet we don’t inter- nalize the costs to polluters. Instead, we let pol- luters off without paying the bill and society as a whole has to pick up the tab. Some even suggest that taxes on gasoline should be reduced, further removing responsi- bility from the most polluting industries and individuals. This makes no sense from an envi- ronmental or an economic perspective. As the respected magazine “The Economisf’ points out, “Petrol taxes are there to capture and charge motorists and others for the externalities they create, such as pollution and congestion.... To cut fuel taxes when oil prices rise is bad eco- nomics as well as bad politics.” Once you factor in external costs to society of degrading natural systems, it’s often a better economic investment to protect some ecosys- tems, rather than exploit them in an intensive industrial fashion. For example, Canada’s huge boreal forest that stretches across the North is one of the world’s most important carbon sinks. It’s incredibly valuable in helping to reduce glob- al warming. If we attach a dollar value to this service we can see why it makes sense to protect large areas of this forest from industrial devel- opment and logging. ‘Trying to conserve little bits of land here or there and trying to protect the variety of life on earth, species by species, just isn’t working. The recent United Nations-sponsored Millennium Ecosystem Assessment told us that 60 percent of the planet’s ecosystem services are currently being degraded by human activities. Focusing on the economic value of these services may well be the only hope we have of protecting them.