The Red List of Threatened Species might best be described as a lack-of-progress report. Every six months or so, the list, which is maintained by the International Union for Conservation of Nature, is updated, and, with each update, more creatures are classified as heading toward oblivion. The latest update, issued last week, added seven hundred species to the roster of those threatened with extinction.
The Convention on Biological Diversity, an international agreement about species conservation, was presented to world leaders in 1992, at the so-called Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, alongside the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. Since then, the climate-change treaty has received the lion’s share of the world’s attention, while the C.B.D. have often been overlooked. The reasons for this disproportion are complicated, but one of them sits in Washington, D.C.
“The U.S. failure to ratify the CBD is a classic case of actual American ‘exemptionalism’—the tendency of the U.S. to seek to make rules for the world, only to defect in the end from a treaty it initially spearheaded,” Stewart Patrick, the director of the Global Order and Institutions Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote recently. At this point, the U.S. is the only member nation of the U.N. that has not ratified the C.B.D.
Does it make sense to set new, more ambitious targets for conservation when the old, more modest ones have yet to be achieved? Certainly it’s hard to imagine that the world, having failed to set aside seventeen per cent of its lands for conservation, will over the next eight years find its way clear to protecting thirty per cent. Many experts have pointed out that the post-2020 targets seem destined to meet the same fate as the Aichi Targets.
Setting targets that are difficult—perhaps impossible—to meet, though, would seem to be better than setting none at all. There is a real danger that the negotiations in Montreal will produce no agreement, or only a vague, watered-down one. The draft of the framework presented to negotiators last week was essentially one long series of disagreements.
enormousness? Mind you I agree it's a huge issue - so why not create a new word for it?🤣
Thus illustrating why Twitter needs a laugh button. elonmusk
Homo sapiens is Earthspeak for cancer.
Did any of the UN conventions reach their objectives? The UN is powerless to bring any significant change
See iamsrk will never get share in the company . Never Ever .
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: cnni - 🏆 326. / 59 Read more »
Source: snopes - 🏆 228. / 63 Read more »
Source: axios - 🏆 302. / 63 Read more »
Source: PageSix - 🏆 320. / 59 Read more »
Source: verge - 🏆 94. / 67 Read more »
Source: nypost - 🏆 91. / 67 Read more »