Invasive
alien species: More than a technical issue
The Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical
and Technological Advice (SBSSTA) of the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD), will hold its thirteenth meeting in Rome from
18 to 22 February 2008.
In the meeting’s agenda there are two
items of extreme importance for WRM’s concerns: forest biodiversity
and invasive alien species. Though they will be treated separately
(the former by the full meeting and the latter by a working group),
we believe that they are inextricably linked.
Invasive alien species are a major cause
of biodiversity loss in forests and other ecosystems, but the
issue of invasive alien tree plantation species is rarely mentioned
or addressed, in spite of the fact that some species of eucalyptus,
pines and acacias have already become invasive in many countries
(e.g. in South Africa, Chile, USA, Uruguay and others).
Although there are many definitions
about the meaning of the concept “alien invasive species”, perhaps
the most accepted one defines them as non-indigenous species that
adversely affect the habitats they invade economically, environmentally
or ecologically.
For any “adversely affected habitat”
it doesn’t matter much how the invasion occurred: if the wind,
water, birds or animals brought in the seeds of plant species
that later spread spontaneously in that habitat or if those species
were introduced by plantation companies and resulted in adverse
economic, environmental or ecological effects.
In line with the above, all large-scale,
monoculture, alien tree plantations are considered to be invasive
by local communities whose habitats –and therefore also livelihoods-
are negatively affected by such plantations. Because of the impacts
on biodiversity resulting from the large scale planting of alien
species as monocultures, they should also be addressed as dangerous
invasive alien species by the Convention on Biodiversity.
In that respect, the SBSSTA experts
should raise and answer the basic question: does such type of
alien tree plantation adversely affect the habitats they invade
or not? In case they do, it is clear that from a biodiversity
conservation perspective they should be banned in the same way
as trade in seeds and plants of other invasive species (e.g. Lantana
camara, Solanum mauritianum) has been prohibited in many countries.
Similar questions should be raised and
answered regarding genetically engineered trees. Is there a risk
that they could adversely affect habitats economically, environmentally
or ecologically? Could they spread spontaneously? Could their
pollen pollute other species? If the answer to these questions
is positive, then the COP8 decision urging to apply the Precautionary
Principle should be upgraded to a total ban on the release of
GE trees.
Though plantation species can spread
spontaneously through wind, water, birds or animals –and the same
can happen with GE trees- plantations themselves do not simply
occur. Neither does research on GE trees. Both are the result
of corporate decisions aimed at increasing their profits.
In that light, if we look at the biodiversity
issue from a political and economic perspective, it is clear that
transnational corporations are the most dangerous invasive alien
species of all. As their natural invasive counterparts do, they
invade lands and forests and destroy habitats that provided the
means of living to countless other species and to local people.
In this bulletin (and many more can
be found in the previous 125 issues), there are sufficient examples
to prove the above: mining corporations in India, Congo, Bangladesh;
pulp and paper corporations in Chile and the USA; oil and logging
corporations in Ecuador; palm oil corporations in Indonesia; polluting
corporations in Zimbabwe. All of them are invading and destroying
biodiversity-rich habitats and local peoples’ livelihoods.
However, we don’t expect SBSSTA to address
that fundamental issue. What we do expect is something more in
line with its mandate as advisory body to the CBD:
- that it adopts a definition
of forests that excludes large scale plantations as such
- that it urges the CBD
to recommend governments to halt the expansion of large scale
monocultures of alien tree species
- that it recommends the
CBD to ban the plantation of tree species that have already proven
to be invasive
- that it recommends the
CBD to ban GE trees
Those would be very positive outcomes
from this SBSSTA meeting for both people and biodiversity.
