How is it possible that nature and ecosystems are in such bad shape when we know the importance of healthy and functioning ecosystems for human well-being? The main reason is of course that there are often trade-offs between different benefits that nature provides, as well as between immediate and long-term benefits. 

Intensive agriculture, fishing, or forestry, for example, provides valuable goods and high economic returns for humans in the short term. In the long term, intensive exploitation of natural resources however often leads to diminishing returns (e.g. land degradation leading to falling crop yields, overfishing leading to fisheries collapses, timber cutting leading to deforestation). Intensive exploitation also reduces other benefits, like regulation of ecological processes and supporting people’s identities, not to mention the well-being and survival of other species.

The domination and exploitation of nature for short-term economic benefits over practices that sustain nature and its various benefits are due to a variety of cultural, economic, political, and social factors. For example, decisions relating to the use of natural resources often involve actors that are highly unequal in power. Large corporations and state actors, for example, are in a more powerful position than ordinary people who may not have strong legal rights to e.g. land or fisheries. Expanding economic activity is often in the interest of the more powerful actors, whereas the long-term impacts are suffered by the local people now and in the future.

Trade has decoupled consumption and production globally, with high-income nations often importing crops and other resources from lower income countries. By consuming imported goods, developed nations are able to reduce the domestic pressure on nature. In exporting countries, pressures on nature are however rising rapidly, while the local people may simultaneously be lacking in basic necessities. Exclusion, scarcity, and unequal distribution of the benefits and costs from the utilization of natural resources may fuel social instability and conflict in a complex interaction with other factors. 

Unsustainable practices are often associated with subsidies, tax abatements, and other instruments designed to boost production in fisheries, aquaculture, agriculture (including fertilizer and pesticide use), livestock management, forestry, mining and energy (including fossil fuels and biofuels). Such instruments can promote deforestation, overfishing, urban sprawl, and wasteful uses of water. 

Moving towards more sustainable production and use of natural resources is possible when multiple values of ecosystem functions and benefits from nature are incorporated into economic incentives. Policies that eliminate environmentally harmful subsidies and introduce incentives in line with more sustainable practices have resulted in improved outcomes in the management of natural resources. Individuals and organizations that benefit from previous practices may however oppose the removal of subsidies or the introduction of other policies. 

Would you like to comment something on this section? Voluntary.