Biodiversity in the city

I spend a lot of my time trying to convince businesses that they are part of the mosaic that makes up the ecological networks that run up and down and all across our country. Of course, we don't have nearly enough networks and that is what I am so passionate about working with businesses who quite often own car parks, verges, roofs and driveways that could all be used to benefit wildlife.

Most of this work is in urban areas but many people involved in conservation still think of biodiversity as being only associated with the countryside.

At a time when we want to get the public behind the biodiversity agenda and hold the decision makers to account, we really need to be thinking urban and not rural.

Many more of us now live in large towns and cities than live in rural areas. Whether we like it or not our economy is driven by the people that work in cities and our biggest companies choose to set up business in towns and cities.

In short, cities appear to hold the most influence and the most cash. And biodiversity needs both.

If we are to tackle the biodiversity challenge on a 'landscape scale' then we need to engage the population of the whole landscape, wherever they are.

Attenborough - the best environmental communicator?

I don't have a Facebook page but my wife does and through her I am able to keep up with the lives of our friends, and their friends, and even their friends.

It really is information overload and thankfully my wife edits the dross, which is most of it, and only shares with me the most basic facts.

However, this week she has shared more than normal because of the 'chatter' that has been exchanged over the ether all about Frozen Planet.

People who we know of all ages are enthralled by Frozen Planet and David Attenborough's charismatic and authoritative style of narration.

I couldn't be happier. Whereas the normal televisual entertainment divides opinion, it appears that Frozen Planet is bringing people together: educating and raising awareness of real issues in an entertaining and accessible way.

This is the art of effective communication and Sir David must surely be the most supreme communicator of environmental messages.

Will we miss this opportunity?

There is a lot of talk at the moment about the need for a credible voice to represent the welfare of our wildlife. Not a zealot who opposes all forms of progress or someone who can be wooed by lunch at the Palace of Westminster but someone who can compose a logical argument for the conservation of wildlife as a priority for the UK.

The feeling is that our NGOs are simply too quiet and have convinced themselves that they stand a better chance of influencing policy from within, rather than shouting from the outside. It seems like a good point until you consider that biodiversity loss in the UK is at crisis point and some of our biggest NGOs have been around for 100 years or more.

So has their strategy worked? The evidence suggests otherwise but I'm sure they would argue that things would be even worse if.....

Nature conservation is relatively new to the UK. Our first real policy for nature was introduced in 1949 following the Huxley Committee report of 1947 which recommended the introduction of protected status for certain areas deemed to be of significant value to nature.

These views were echoed by the first Chairman of the Nature Conservancy, Arthur Tansley, who wrote in 1945 that he blamed high taxes and death duties for the break up of large family estates which was leading to development and land use change on previously 'safe' lands. Therefore these sites needed 'public protection'.

Fast forward to 2010 and another government report, Making Space for Nature, chaired by Sir John Lawton, states that the system of protecting nature in reserves hasn't worked and that what is required is landscape scale conservation that considers all the areas in between the reserves not just the reserves themselves.

Our biggest NGOs can claim to have had the same thoughts when they launched their own initiatives such as Futurescapes and Living Landscapes but these have only really been around for the past 5 years or so and most data about biodiversity loss show declines from the 1960s and 1970s so why has it taken so long to think in terms of landscapes rather than reserves?

And why has it been another government report that everyone is suddenly citing?

Yes nature does need someone to stand up for it but is anyone up to the job?

I read with interest that our Prime Minister won't be attending the Earth Summit in Rio next year because it clashes with a previous engagement - the Queen's Diamond Jubilee. He was being slated for the snub with claims that it sends a message that we're not taking the environment seriously. What do people think he can add? I'm sure there are people far better qualified, after all it wasn't a Prime Minister that wrote 'Making Space for Nature'.

So who is qualified? I played this game with some friends recently, it was a bit like 'Who would like to invite to dinner?'. Suggestions varied wildly from Sir Paul McCartney to Kate Humble to Johnny Kingdom and more (and worse).

I myself suggested sending in Peter Marren to negotiate, Mark Avery to create the policy and Sir David Attenborough to smooth things over.

With so much chatter about biodiversity at the moment it seems to me that there is a real opportunity to capture the public imagination and really do something that will halt biodiversity loss but it is going to take someone or an organisation who is willing to stand up to government, build bridges between the NGOs, motivate the hugely impressive volunteers, and look for the opportunities not the problems.

Failing that we need a revolution.

Reward and recognition

The government wants to halt biodiversity loss by 2020.

The biggest contributor to biodiversity loss is change of land use. The most drastic change of land use is building development. And it is businesses that are the developers - building houses, offices, shops, and infrastructure.

So how do you incentivise businesses to be more considerate with the natural environment?

Awards are great but they are normally one-off events and allow businesses to create 'token gestures' rather than actually change their culture and way of working. We've all seen this before with the 'eco-shop' or the 'eco-house'. These are great if you are going to do the same with all your developments but they are just a PR stunt if you're not.

BREEAM seem to have struck a chord with energy. More and more developers are registering their schemes for BREEAM accreditation. Of course, there are different levels and not everyone aspires to achieve the highest but at least businesses are taking part and by taking part they are changing the way they approach their work.

Can we do the same for biodiversity?

The scheme needs to be nationwide, realistic, affordable and have scales of achievement - bronze, silver, gold, platinum - that sort of thing.

A developer isn't going to create a nature reserve but they might be more inclined to leave more green space, introduce habitat, install boxes, source responsibly and help spread the biodiversity message, if it meant getting a credible award to sit alongside their other environmental achievements.

I'm willing to help shape it, so who is going to do it?