Most Wars Occur in Biodiversity Hotspots

Most Wars Occur in Biodiversity Hotspots

www.livescience.com

More than 80 percent of the world's major armed conflicts from 1950-2000 occurred in regions identified as the most biologically diverse and threatened places on Earth.

Scientists compared major conflict zones with the Earth's 34 biodiversity hotspots identified by Conservation International (CI). The hotspots are considered top conservation priorities because they contain the entire populations of more than half of all plant species and at least 42 percent of all vertebrates, and are highly threatened.

"This astounding conclusion — that the richest storehouses of life on Earth are also the regions of the most human conflict — tells us that these areas are essential for both biodiversity conservation and human well-being," said Russell A. Mittermeier, president of Conservation International (CI) and an author of the study.

"Millions of the world's poorest people live in hotspots and depend on healthy ecosystems for their survival, so there is a moral obligation — as well as political and social responsibility — to protect these places and all the resources and services they provide," Mittermeier said.

The finding, announced today, is published in the journal Conservation Biology.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.sciencedaily.com

This to me was no surprise, what with all the oil in the Middle East, diamonds in Africa and call centers in India.

I like the part where it talks about "the moral, political and social responsibilities, to protect all the resources and services they provide" - Does that give us non hotspot zoners the right the take charge on these areas, for their safety?

I found this article interesting and thought I would share.




www.livescience.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

They didn't seem to actually list where these 34 hot spots are.

I'd like to map them out myself to verify their information.

If there is a correlation between human aggression and rich biodiversity, that's certainly an interesting concept to ponder.

But I'd still like to verify their information before I trust it.



By the way though... wouldn't that suggest all of Canada, Alaska, and northern Russia should be one massive war zone?

[edit on 20-2-2009 by johnsky]

reply to post by johnsky


If, in the near future, resources become scarce, then maybe places like Canada and Alaska might become targets.

Some of the hotspots.
Content from source -
www.livescience.com...

"The study found that certain hotspots were especially sensitive to climate change with extinctions sometimes exceeding 2,000 plant species per hotspot. These include the Caribbean, the Tropical Andes, Cape Floristic region of South Africa, Southwest Australia, the Atlantic forests of Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina."

First off, good find. Flagged for some attention to this.
Secondly perhaps this is simply just human tendency to go after places that are warmer and have constant life cycles.
The tropical forests provide natural cover, natural resources like a continuous supply of food, always rainy, etc.
But some of these other places are simply dead and dry yet have large amounts of resources underground. I'm going to go with the human urge to expand, conquer, and earn greater understanding.