Similar to how the IPCC represents key scientific consensus on climate change, IPBES produces important findings for decision making and stakeholders in the field of biodiversity. In 2019, the plenary yielded a global assessment on biodiversity and ecosystem services that sounded the alarm on a global crisis of biodiversity loss. According to the report, one million plant and animal species across the world are at risk of extinction. Although these numbers are sobering, this knowledge is essential for conservation policy and science. This year, the platform planned to approve two new reports highlighting the diverse uses and values of wildlife to humans and non-humans.

IPBES 9 took place both virtually and in Bonn, Germany from July 3-9, 2022. Students from the master program Global Change Ecology (GCE) could attend either as observers of the conference or as volunteers with the IPBES secretariat. In both cases, they were able to attend sessions, meet science and policy experts, and see firsthand the process of international negotiations. GCE sent more than 20 student volunteers to help run the event. This included tasks such as registration, running the help desk, managing the IPBES social media channels, working in the back office, and managing representatives in the session.

Personal Reflections from a Back Office Volunteer

When I first signed up to volunteer at IPBES 9, I was not sure what to expect. In all honesty, I had never actually heard of IPBES before. Nevertheless, I was interested in learning more about the organization and gaining experience through volunteering.

I chose to volunteer in the back office because I have technical skills that could come in handy. I had volunteered at some conferences in the past, so I figured that the experience would be somewhat similar. However, upon arriving at the venue, I realized that this experience would be different in some key ways.

For one, the stakes were much higher. As a matter of international diplomacy, attendees were not representing themselves, but their governments. Additionally, while IPBES is not a UN body, the United Nations Environment Program provides the secretariat for the plenary. As a result, student volunteers got to volunteer and interact with UN employees. The international and intergovernmental nature of this event made it feel very “serious” and, as student volunteers, we appreciated the importance of our work. 

When it came to my work specifically, I was very satisfied with my experience volunteering in the back office. I assisted the technical team with essential tasks such as:

• Sending push notifications to attendees through the conference app
• Updating the session schedule as times changed
• Posting media releases to the website
• Managing and monitoring online participants
• Troubleshooting technical issues

As an outside observer of IPBES 9, it would be easy to overlook the people working “behind the scenes”. As a volunteer, however, it is clear that there is a lot more that goes into these negotiations than meets the eye. While the experts, policy makers, diplomats and stakeholders are the focus of the negotiations, it is the IPBES secretariat and conference technicians that ensure the meeting goes smoothly.

Working on the technical side of the conference meant doing a lot of “little things” such as hitting “record” on zoom sessions, checking equipment, responding to emails, editing powerpoints, etc. Many of these tasks needed to be completed simultaneously or in a limited time period. While the work was fast-paced, I definitely feel like I learned a lot about managing my time, prioritizing tasks, and problem solving. Additionally, I always worked on a team and with a supervisor who could assist if need be.

Due to the nature of the work, I listened closely to the discussions and followed along for the duration of the (lengthy) sessions. As a result, I was able to pay attention to the details and nuances of the diplomatic process. It was surprising to see how finely the member states dissected the language and terminology of the reports. Of course, the point of the plenary is precisely this, to involve various governments in the communication of science and policy. This meant that every member state had to agree on every single word of the documents approved.

The tedious reviewing process took place every day, all day. When the reports were finally approved, it was hard not to get swept up in the emotion of it all. It was particularly exciting for the experts who had been working on these documents for four years to finally see their work come to fruition. Even as a volunteer who had just recently learned about the mission of IPBES, I was ecstatic that I could see this process happen. In a way, it felt as if I were along for the ride, especially after seeing all of the hard work that the volunteers, secretariat and technicians had put into facilitating it. The final days were marked by overwhelming excitement (and exhaustion) after a very busy and intense week. Now we waited for the outside world to get the reports.

Results of IPBES 9

The result of IPBES 9 was the publishing of two landmark reports, the “Assessment report on the sustainable use of wild species” and the “Methodological assessment regarding the diverse conceptualization of multiple values of nature and its benefits”. With thousands of references and dozens of contributing authors, these reports present important scientific and policy consensus.

According to the sustainable use assessment, 1 in 5 people around the world rely on some 50,000 wild species for purposes such as food, fuel, medicine etc. For the world’s poor, this dependence is even greater. The findings from this assessment highlight the importance of wild species for humans.

The values assessment points out that the predominant short-sighted view of nature is the main driver of biodiversity loss. Instead of viewing nature as merely a commodity to exploit, the assessment highlights more than 50 alternative methods and approaches to value nature. This includes indigenous perspectives and women’s involvement in stewardship decisions.

When considered together, the findings highlight the importance of changing our relationship to nature and protecting biodiversity. Especially in order to protect vulnerable people all over the world in the face of climate change, conflict, the pandemic, and inflation. As a student who studies in the field of ecology, biodiversity, and global change, it was a truly educational experience to learn about these two reports. Not to mention the skills, experiences, and networking I did along the way.

The post Reflections on IPBES 9 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Although economic and social impacts are more apparent, the effects the pandemic has had on the environment and biodiversity are substantial. The Global Risks Report 2022 shows that, since the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis, risks such as human environmental damage, biodiversity loss, extreme weather, and climate action failure, have worsened by 7.8%, 8.4%, 22.7%, and 25.4%, respectively. Furthermore, climate change failure and extreme weather will soon become a critical threat to the world, followed by biodiversity loss, natural resources crises, and human environmental damage. These five represent 50% of the top ten most severe risks on a global scale.

Nonetheless, the risks are not isolated in themselves, generating repercussions to other risks and vice-versa. For instance, biodiversity losses impact not only their environment and habitats, but also have effects on livelihood crises, infectious diseases spread, and pollution harms to health, to mention a few. International cooperation is essential on directing efforts and resources to mitigate the current reality and potentially change future scenarios before those risks become irreversible or self-reinforcing.

For further insights, you can read the Global Risks Report 2022 clicking here, and watch below the Press Conference of The Global Risks Report 2022, where the speakers discuss key findings from the report:

The post The Global Risks Report 2022: A call for awakening appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

From stable states to the Anthropocene

Before the journey through the current and future state of our planet begins, the narrators take us back to the past. Emphasis is put on the stable state of the earth’s climate in the Holocene, and how this stability has allowed the modern world as we know it to develop. Continuously maintaining this stability is crucial for the systems that underpin our modern world. But we now have left this state of stability and entered a new geological epoch, termed the Anthropocene. Rockström highlights that, in only 50 years, we have pushed the climate past the state it has been in for the last 10.000 years. He draws a stirring comparison to us humans driving towards a cliff in the dark at full speed, with no headlights on. But in his view, science provides headlights, so that we can see the risks ahead of us. 

The risk of destabilizing the whole planet inspired Rockström and his colleagues to identify the systems and processes which regulate the state of earth. Next to defining these earth system processes, they also quantified the point beyond which we trigger non-linear changes (tipping points) and called these the planetary boundaries. They defined 3 zones for each system: the safe zone, the danger zone, and the high danger zone. The difference between the latter two is that the danger zone represents the range of uncertainty. The high danger zone, on the other hand, is beyond the range of uncertainty, and we face great risks of reaching tipping points here. Once we understand these systems and boundaries, we can not only identify which ones we have already crossed, but also how to return to the safe space again.

The planetary boundaries

The narrators kick the journey off with the first and most commonly known process, climate change. As we are all aware, we have already destabilized the climate system. In fact, we have already crossed the planetary boundary of 350 ppm of atmospheric CO2 concentration to the danger zone – and we are rapidly approaching the boundary to the high danger zone, which is represented by 1.5 °C warming or 450 ppm atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Next, the journey goes to the biosphere boundaries: the systems of land, biodiversity, freshwater, and nutrients fall into this category. For all of these, except the freshwater system, we have already crossed into the danger zone. Biodiversity loss and biogeochemical fluxes fall deep into the high danger zone and the land use change closely approaches it. Rockström highlights that the 1.5 °C target equivalent for biodiversity loss is zero loss of nature from now on. Also, the issue of nutrient flows, causing for example large scale eutrophication, needs to be taken more seriously. For freshwater use, we are still in the safe zone.

Ocean acidification is another process for which we are still in the safe zone, but we are just a step away from crossing the boundary into the danger zone. Arriving in this danger zone would have devastating consequences for all marine life.

There are two systems for which no boundaries could be defined yet: novel entities (e.g. nuclear waste, microplastic, heavy metals) and atmospheric aerosol concentration. Even though we do not know where we stand for these, we still need to limit the disposal and emission of these substances, as the environmental and air pollution has alarming consequences for nature and human health.

The last process gives us hope for the future: Ozone depletion, the only example for which we have passed way into the high danger zone but managed to reverse course through immediate and globally coordinated action. This shows that it is possible to return to a safe space if enough effort is put into it.

From a grim reality to sparking hope

Besides introducing us to the framework of planetary boundaries and where we stand on them, the narrators also paint a picture of the far-reaching destruction that we humans have already caused nature. In this very emotional section of the documentary, we hear from an Australian scientist on how he has seen the devastating effects of coral bleaching and the loss of whole reef systems in the course of his career. Another Australian scientist takes us to her research site, where she studies a vulnerable Australian bird species, after the destructive fires of the 2019/2020 fire season. Her arrival at the site during nesting season with all the nests destroyed and no wildlife remaining is heartbreaking to watch. But who is not moved by these pictures will be given food for thought by the linkages the narrators draw between the current pandemic and nature loss.

After opening our eyes for some of these far-reaching impacts we have on nature, we are provided with hope. According to Rockström, the window for us to turn around and move out of the danger zone is still open, but just barely. In the last part of the documentary, the narrators explain simple ways in which we can return to the safe space. These solutions reach from an immediate reduction of emissions, to planting more trees, having a healthy and climate friendly flexitarian diet, and reducing waste. The core message of the conclusion is that we do need to act now – and efforts must be globally coordinated, as what we do in this decade will determine the future course of humanity and our planet.

Opinion on the documentary

What makes this documentary extraordinary in my opinion is that it acts as a wake-up call, not only on the issue of climate change but on the multitude of complex and intertwined issues humanity has caused and is facing the consequences of now. The documentary provides a great introduction to the framework of planetary boundaries, and I encourage anyone interested in this topic to watch it, or dive in deeper by reading some of the papers Rockström and colleagues have published on this.

While the main part of the documentary was very interesting and emotionally moving, I have to admit that I was slightly disappointed with the section on solutions. After spending the majority of the time on showing us how bad the state of our planet is and how we humans have caused this, the solutions were portrayed in an overly simplistic way. By making the solutions sound so simple, I feel like in the end the issues are slightly downplayed after framing the current state of our planet and our future so grim at first. But this is only my personal opinion and since I still find it a very interesting and eye-opening documentary, I leave it to you to watch it and make up your mind about it.

References:

Main source: “Breaking boundaries: The science of our planet”, 2021, Netflix film directed by Jonathan Clay.

[1] https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/netflix-documentary-201cbreaking-boundaries201d-with-pik-director-johan-rockstrom-and-sir-david-attenborough-special-preview-at-biden-climate-summit , last accessed 01.07.2021

[2] Planetary boundaries illustration: J. Lokrantz/Azote based on Steffen et al. 2015. Available online: https://stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries.html , last accessed 01.07.2021

Further reading:

Rockström, J., W. Steffen, Noone, K. et al. 2009. Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 14, 32. URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/

Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. 2009.  A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461, 472–475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a

Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J et al. 2015. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347, 1259855. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855

The post Movie Review: Breaking Boundaries – The Science of our Planet appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

In their first-ever collaboration, the IPCC and the IPBES co-sponsored a workshop, bringing 50 climate and biodiversity experts together to study relationships and identify solutions for solving these crises. The result of this meeting was a peer-reviewed workshop report that went live this week! In this blog post, we will discuss some of the workshop’s findings at the intersection of climate, biodiversity, and human society.

Climate-biodiversity-human linkages

How do these factors interplay? Underlying anthropogenic drivers, such as economic production and consumption, give rise to direct impacts like land use change, pollution, and overexploitation of natural systems – all of which contribute to climate change and biodiversity loss. These declines, in turn, can reinforce each other. For instance, climate change effects such as temperature increases, precipitation shifts, or extreme events can cause extinctions and erode ecosystem resilience. Associated biodiversity loss then influences the climate system via changes in nutrient cycling, for example. All of this also gives rise to impacts on human livelihoods and well-being, with consequences to across sectors like public health and food production and security.

Minimal tradeoffs, maximal benefits

Some interventions come with tradeoffs. For instance, a common idea is that the planting of forests stores carbon, thus lowering atmospheric C concentrations and limiting climate change. However, the solution is not quite so simple. Large swaths of monoculture forests can increase the risk of pests and diseases as well as limit productivity and take up space for habitat, damaging biodiversity and ecosystem services. At the same time, solutions exist that can benefit both climate and biodiversity by restoring and protecting carbon- and species-rich ecosystems.

There are ways that we can combine measures in order to both limit tradeoffs and gain benefits. A good example is the use of solar farms to generate clean energy, which is necessary for climate objectives. At the same time, these solar farms use large amounts of land, potentially contributing to the clearing of important habitat. However, by implementing grazing and cropping around panels, we can benefit soil carbon stocks and pollinators, while also providing food (and still gaining clean energy). The integration of climate and biodiversity allow us to support solutions that complement each other by balancing tradeoffs and promoting co-benefits.

Transformative change

It is clear that we need to explicitly consider connections between climate, biodiversity, and people in governance and policy decisions in order to develop the most efficient solutions. However, the report notes that this integration will require transformative change in governance systems and in policies, to support higher levels of intersectoral cooperation and inclusive decision-making as well as to create effective incentives. Ultimately, this coincides with a need for an overall shift in society’s collective values. This can involve, for instance, changing from a focus on “development” defined by ever-increasing economic growth to a focus on just, equitable, and resilient development within planetary boundaries.

For more detailed information on the climate-biodiversity nexus and how this interacts with human well-being, take a look at the full scientific outcome from the workshop!

References:

[1] Pörtner, HO et al. 2021. IPBES-IPCC co-sponsored workshop report on biodiversity and climate change; IPBES and IPCC. DOI:10.5281/zenodo.4782538. Access here, full outcome here.

[2] Images generated by IPCC and IPBES. Access here.

The post Climate and Biodiversity Crises: Two Parts of One Problem appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

As a master’s student of natural science, I know of what I am speaking: A vast number of scientific papers is extremely hard to read (and therefore understand). Additionally, the reach of the publishing journals is limited – often, you need to pay high amounts of money just to access a paper. People with a good understanding of the subject and with the ability to communicate these papers are truly needed. In order to get insights into this business, I went to the 11th World Conference of Science Journalists (WCSJ) in Lausanne, in the French-speaking part of Switzerland. It took place in the L’Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), a research institute and university in Lausanne.

The WCSJ is an event by the World Federation of Science journalists and is held every two years. In 2017, it was in San Francisco, USA. The next conference will take place in Medellín, Colombia, as was announced at the end of the event in Lausanne. This notice made for loud cheering from the side of the Colombian people at the conference.

In total, 1200 people took part in this conference: journalists, scientists, members of the EU, chairpersons of international scientific associations such as the IPCC or IPBES, members of communication boards of universities all around the globe – and some (very few) students like me. The aim of this biannual conference is to bring together professionals and students in science journalism to exchange skills, ideas and thoughts. But also, to build networks and form collaboration on a global scale. During the conference, many science journalists reported about their way into science writing and the possibilities and challenges of this job. 

The spectrum of talks, panel discussions, workshops and presentations was broad. There were three big auditoriums, hosting one major event after the other with a variety of topics. “The new goldrush: Prospects and controversies in deep seabed mining”, “Fake-news in science: How to recognize and fight it” or “Biodiversity: Reporting a silent crisis” – there was something for everyone. Researchers and science journalist from all over the world came together, discussed possible solutions for different challenges. Not all speakers could attend the conference physically, which is why some of them were called in via Skype. During a talk about marine protection, a number of researchers took part in a panel discussion, some of them sitting in chairs at the beach on a small island in the Indian Ocean, their feet in the white sand, the sound of the waves in the background echoing in the big hall in Lausanne. One of the highlights of the conference was the talk of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) chairman Hoesung Lee. The auditorium was jam-packed, everyone wanted to hear what he had to say. He spoke about the findings of the current report on 1.5°C warming. He especially pointed out the necessity of combining different fields of research: “We have a good understanding of the technological and economic feasibility, but the social dimensions leave room for more knowledge”, Hoesung says. “We need a change in behaviour. We need a different economy.” He also talks about the choices in private and daily life. Particularly, he emphasizes the need for better infrastructure in remote areas: “Public transportation in cities is often very good. But in the countryside, you often have no choice.” Yet, one aspect he is not talking about – even when asked from the audience – is a change in diet. Even though it is well known that the meat consumption is one of the main reasons for greenhouse gas emissions. “What food choices people make, is not our area.”

Another special feature of the conference were the field trips offered on various days. Every participant could sign up in advance for the field trip they were interested in. Those trips included, for example, a trip to the research station at Jungfraujoch at 3700 meters of altitude, where climatic research has been done for the last 100 years. As temperature measurements at the station suggest, that the annual mean temperature has risen by 1.8°C since 1933. “I remember, when I started my research here around 40 years ago, the glacier was so much bigger”, Bertrand Calpini says and lets his glance wander over the Eiger glacier, which spans under the research station. He is head of the Deputy Director of the Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology (MeteoSwiss) and Head of the Measurements and Data Department in MeteoSwiss.

The final speech of the conference was held by Bob Watson, chairmen of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) since 2017. With wild gestures and his loud voice, the 71-year-old scientist with the greying white beard calls the audience for action. In his speech – which was originally set for 40 minutes and shortly before Watson’s presentation was cut to 20 minutes – he urges everyone to do write about biodiversity loss and climate change, pointing out the absolute necessity to change humankind’s current lifestyle. “In 2060, we will be probably beyond 2°C of global warming, more likely are 3-3.5°C”, he says while walking on the stage. “That means that countries have to double and triple their efforts to maintain the climate below 2°C warming! This is necessary to secure biodiversity and the global climate!”

What I have taken home from this conference is that it is absolutely necessary to look at as many facets of science as possible. Only focussing on one topic, one direction, may give ideas for this very subject. Yet, in order to understand the bigger picture, and to be able to write about it in a comprehensible way, it is essential to illuminate it from every perspective possible. It’s not only political injustice – but it can also go in hand with environmental disasters caused by political decisions. It’s not only climate change – it’s as well the social impacts that go along with it.

The post A review on the World Conference for Science Journalists appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Lauthals singen die „Summer“ in der kleinen gefliesten Küche mit, als der bekannte Ärzte-Song aus den Lautsprechern schallt, die auf einem Schränkchen stehen. Einige tanzen mit nacktem Oberkörper, es ist warm und stickig. Deine Schuld ist quasi das perfekte Lied für diese Party: Die Studenten feiern das erfolgreiche Volksbegehren für die Artenvielfalt in Bayern. Sie wollten die Schuld, dass die Welt sich nicht verändert nicht länger auf sich nehmen. Wochenlang haben sie Flyer verteilt, in der Februarkälte als Rathauslotsen in der Fußgängerzone gestanden, in Bienenkostümen Passanten angesprochen, um diese auf das Volksbegehren aufmerksam zu machen. Immer noch in orangefarbenen Warnwesten mit dem Aufdruck „Rettet die Bienen“ auf dem Rücken tanzen sie ausgelassen durch die Wohnung, in der die Feier stattfindet.

„Glaub keinem, der dir sagt, dass du nichts verändern kannst.
Die, die das behaupten, haben nur vor Veränderung Angst.“

Am Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2019, ging die Abstimmung zu Ende und es stand fest: Es geht in die nächste Runde, die benötigten eine Million Unterschriften wurde bayernweit erreicht. Besser gesagt wurde sie sogar deutlich überschritten. Insgesamt haben mehr als 1,7 Millionen Menschen in Bayern in den Rathäusern dafür unterschrieben, dass sie einen Volksentscheid für die Artenvielfalt wollen. “Das Volksbegehren in Bayern setzt ein klares Zeichen, auch bei den jetzigen Verhandlungen in der EU-Agrarpolitik“, sagt Stefanie Propp, zweite Vorsitzende der Summer und Sprecherin des Aktionsbündnisses in Bayreuth für das Volksbegehren. „Ich war mir sicher, dass wir die 1 Mio. Unterschriften erreichen. Dass es jetzt über 18 % geworden sind, freut und bestätigt mich in unserem Engagement umso mehr!”

Die „Summer“ haben in Bayreuth definitiv zum Erfolg des Begehrens beigetragen. Wer steckt hinter diesem Namen? 2018 haben einige Bayreuther Studierende den Verein Summer in der City gegründet, mit dem sie das Thema Artenvielfalt mehr in den Fokus der Öffentlichkeit rücken wollen. „Wir waren zu neunt und wollten etwas verändern“, sagt Thomas Pickel. Der 27-Jährige studiert Geoökologie an der Universität Bayreuth und ist einer der Gründer von Summer in der City. „Momentan haben wir 15 Mitglieder, die sich ganz aktiv beteiligen und mehrmals in der Woche etwas beitragen. Und sonst noch 30 bis 40, die auch oft mitmachen.“ Bisher finanziert sich der Verein komplett über Spenden und die Mitgliedsbeiträge. Zehn Euro im Jahr kostet es, wenn man ein Summer werden möchte. “Es ist super schön zu sehen, dass so viele Menschen aktiv den Naturschutz voran bringen wollen“, sagt Summerin Leonie Gass. „Es gibt mir neuen Schwung und neues Vertrauen, dass sich wirklich etwas verändern kann und die Bereitwilligkeit da ist!”

Anfangs waren es eher kleinere Projekte, bei denen die Summer ihr Fachwissen mit anderen Menschen teilen konnten. Sie sorgten unter anderem in Kooperation mit Green Campus und Christian Laforsch, Professor für Tierökologie an der Universität Bayreuth, dafür, dass auf dem Campus der Uni Bayreuth nur noch zweimal pro Jahr der Rasen gemäht wird. Dadurch gelangen viel mehr Pflanzen bis zum Blühstadium und bieten Insekten Nahrung und Lebensraum.

Zusätzlich zu den Blühflächen, die die Uni im vergangenen Jahr geschaffen hat, bauten die Studierenden Insektenhotels, die bald aufgestellt werden sollen. In der Wilhelminenaue, wo 2016 die Landesgartenschau in Bayreuth stattgefunden hat, haben die Summer auf der Fläche der Essbaren Stadt  einen Magerstandort geschaffen. Der soll den Insekten das Leben ebenfalls erleichtern. „Das war unser Steckenpferd im vergangenen Jahr“, sagt Stefanie Propp.

„Uns geht’s ums Aktivsein. Wir kennen das Problem, aber wir wollen uns nicht nur darüber aufregen, sondern wir packen es aktiv an“, sagt Thomas Pickel.

„Weil jeder, der die Welt nicht ändern will, ihr Todesurteil unterschreibt!“

Die Tatsache, dass der Großteil der Mitglieder der Summer bisher aus Studierenden bestehe ist Fluch und Segen zugleich. Segen, weil viele sich aufgrund ihrer Studiengänge gut mit dem Thema Artenvielfalt auskennen. Fluch, weil dadurch ein fliegender Wechsel entsteht. Deshalb wünschen sich die Summer, auch Menschen außerhalb der Universität mit einbinden zu können.

Damit das gelingt, wollen sie noch mehr in öffentlichen Räumen arbeiten. „Wir haben für dieses Jahr zwei große Leuchtturmprojekte geplant“, sagt Thomas Pickel. Erstens ein Naturgartenprojekt, bei dem die Summer auf 10.000 m2 in der Wilhelminenaue einen Naturgarten anlegen dürfen. Eine Crowdfunding-Kampagne soll den Garten finanzieren. „In dem Naturgarten soll es unter anderem einen Wildrosengarten und eine Streuobstwiese geben, die ebenfalls Insekten anziehen und anderen Tieren wie Igeln oder Eidechsen ein neues Zuhause bieten.“

Zweitens ist mit „Flanken Flowers“ das zweite Projekt für 2019 geplant. Dabei kooperieren die Summer mit regionalen Gärtnereien, um heimische Blühpflanzen und Sträucher zum Verkauf anzubieten. Das ist insofern von Bedeutung, dass einige Insekten auf spezielle Pflanzen angewiesen sind. „Wir hoffen, dass unser Naturgarten die Leute anregt, selbst so einen Garten bei sich zuhause anzulegen.“

Schlaflose Nächte, schmerzende Arme und Beine vom Bodenbeackern, die Menschen aufrütteln – das ist für die Summer oftmals Alltag. Doch es scheint sich zu lohnen: Die Tatsache, dass beinahe doppelt so viele Menschen das Volksbegehren unterschrieben haben wie benötigt, macht Mut. Es tut sich etwas. Es braucht nur jemanden, der den ersten Schritt geht. Wie die Summer.

„Es ist nicht deine Schuld, dass die Welt ist, wie sie ist.
Es wär nur deine Schuld, wenn sie so bleibt!“

The post Summendes Bayreuth: Studenten im Einsatz für die Biodiversität appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

At the top of their voices, the “Summers” are singing the lyrics of the famous song of the German band “Die Ärzte”in the small, tiled kitchen. Some of them have taken off their shirts and dance around, it is warm and stuffy. “Your fault” is probably the perfect song for this party: the students are celebrating the success of the referendum for biodiversity protection in Bavaria. They not longer wanted to be responsible for no changes in the world. For weeks, they have distributed leaflets, stood in the freezing weather of February to speak with pedestrians, dressed in bee costumes, to raise awareness for the referendum on biodiversity. Still wearing their orange safety vests with the imprint “Save the bees” on the back, they dance through the apartment, where the party takes place.

“Don’t believe anyone who tells you, you can’t change a thing.

Those who say that are just scared of changes.”

On Wednesday, 13 February 2019, the referendum ended and it was clear: The topic enters the next round, the needed 1 million signatures, equivalent to 10% of the population,  have been collected in Bavaria. To be more precise, the needed limit has been exceeded. In total, more than 1.7 million people have signed the petition in the city halls across Bavaria, indicating that they want more biodiversity protection and conservation. “The referendum in Bavaria is a clear sign, also for the current negotiations in the EU agricultural policy”, Stefanie Propp says, second chairwoman of the “Summers”. In Bayreuth, she was as well speaker for the referendum on biodiversity. “I was sure, we would reach one million signatures. But more than 18 percent were achieved, that makes me even more happy and shows our dedication is worth it!”

In Bayreuth, the “Summers” have definitely helped the referendum to succeed. But who is behind that name? In 2018, various students of the University of Bayreuth founded the club “Summer in der City” to put a spotlight on biodiversity. “We were nine students and wanted to change something”, Thomas Pickel says. The 27-year-old student of geoecology is one of the founders of Summer in der City. Their name is not a hidden sign for a club of Joe Cocker fans but refers to the word “summen” which means “buzz” in German – very accurate for a club trying to save insects. “Currently, we have 15 members who are very active, meaning they are contributing more than once a week. Furthermore, there are 30 to 40 more people who are also helping often.” So far, the club is completely funded by donations and the membership fees. It costs 10 Euro per year  to become a “Summer”. “It is wonderful to see that so many people want to contribute to nature conservation”, Leonie Gass, member of the Summers, says. “It gives me new power and new confidence that something is going to change!”

Initially, they could share their expertise with others in smaller projects. So, they made sure that the meadows at the campus of University of Bayreuth are only mowed twice a year. This happened in cooperation with Green Campus and Christian Laforsch, professor for animal ecology at the University of Bayreuth. This way, more plants are blooming and thus offering food and habitat for insects.

While the University of Bayreuth mixed seeds into the ploughed soil and created space for insects that way, the students built insect hotels. Soon, they will install them on campus. At “Wilhelminenaue”, the Summers have created grassland and low-nutrient habitats on the area of the initiative “Essbare Stadt Bayreuth” (German for eatable city). Insects will also find new space to live on there. “This was our main project last year”, Stefanie Propp says.

“We wanted to get active. We know the problem, but we don’t just want to complain about it but actually change something”, Thomas Pickel says.

“Because everyone who doesn’t want to change the world, is signing her death sentence!”

The fact that most members of the Summers are students is both, a curse and a saviour at the same time. A saviour, because they have a lot of expertise in that topic due to their study programmes. A curse, because students often move away, causing frequent changes.

Therefore, the Summers wish to engage more people from outside the university. To make this happen, they want to work more in public areas.

“For this year, we have planned two big projects”, Thomas Pickel says. First, there is a nature garden project which provides the Summers the chance to create a natural garden on an area of 10.000 m2 in Wilhelminenaue. A crowdfunding campaign is supposed to help to construct the garden. “In the nature garden, amongst others, there will be a wild rose garden and a meadow orchard. They will as well attract insects and create new habitats for other animals such as hedgehogs and lizards.”

Second, there is the project “Franken Flowers”. It is planned for 2019: The Summers cooperate with regional market gardens to sell domestic indigenous flowers and shrubs. This is important as some insects rely on special plants. “We hope, the natural garden will encourage people to create such a garden at their homes as well.”

Sleepless nights, sore arms and legs from digging in soil, working hard to awaken other people – all that is often the daily life of the Summers. But is seems to be rewarded: The fact that nearly twice as much people as needed signed the referendum, bolsters them. Some movement is happening. It just needs someone to take the first step. Just like the Summers.

„It is not your fault, the world is at it is. It would just be your fault if she stayed like this!”

The post How students take the first step for biodiversity appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Der Grund dafür: Deutschlands Insekten. Oder besser gesagt, deren Rettung. Im Oktober 2017 ging eine Studie wie ein Lauffeuer um die Welt, die besagte, dass in geschützten Gebieten ein Rückgang von 75% aller Insekten zu verzeichnen ist. „Das war für uns der Punkt, an dem wir gesagt haben, wir müssen handeln“, sagt Thomas Pickel und nippt an seiner Kaffeetasse. Gemeinsam mit acht weiteren Studienfreunden gründete der Geoökologie-Student „Summer in the City“, einen Verein für den Artenschutz. „Jahrelang haben Naturschützer versucht, auf die Problematik des Artenschwunds aufmerksam zu machen. Sie haben symbolträchtige Tiere gewählt wie den Weißstorch oder den Wolf. Es ist beinahe ironisch, dass es dann mit den kleinen Insekten geklappt hat, die Menschen aufzurütteln.“

Der Artenschwund der Insekten war immer wieder Thema in den Medien. Vor allem ein bestimmter Vertreter dieser Lebewesen ist dadurch in den Fokus gerückt: die Biene. „Insekten mögen klein sein, aber sie machen eine unglaublich große Masse aus und sind ungeheuer wichtig. In Deutschland gibt es 48.000 Arten von Tieren – 33.000 davon sind allein Insekten“, sagt Pickel. Inzwischen ist der Artenschwund in Bayern in der Debattenliste so weit nach oben gewandert, dass sich etwas grundsätzlich ändern könnte: Durch das Volksbegehren “Artenvielfalt Rettet die Bienen!“ können wahlberechtigte Bürger in Bayern ab dem 31. Januar bis zum 13. Februar darüber abstimmen, ob sie Gesetze für mehr Artenschutz in ihrem Bundesland wollen.

Diese Gesetze würden unter anderem Pestizideinsatz in Biotopen verbieten, die ökologische Landwirtschaft stärken (bis 2030 sollen 30% der Landwirtschaft in Bayern ökologisch sein) und die Randstreifen von natürlichen Gewässern schützen. „In allen anderen 15 Bundesländern in Deutschland gibt es bereits einen Schutz von 5 Metern links und rechts von natürlichen Gewässern. Dort darf kein Ackerbau stattfinden, durch den Düngemittel und Pestizide in das Wasser fließen und die dort laichenden Arten stören,“ sagt Pickel.

Er ist überzeugt, dass das Volksbegehren Erfolg haben wird. „Zwei Wochen sind keine lange Zeit“, räumt er ein. In dieser Zeit müssen bayernweit eine Million Unterschriften gesammelt werden. „Aber es hat schon zweimal bei anderen Themen geklappt, bei denen keiner dran geglaubt hat.“ Damit meint Pickel die Volksbegehren in Bayern zum Nichtraucherschutz und den Studiengebühren. Ersteres war 2010 erfolgreich und hatte zur Folge, dass Rauchen an öffentlichen Orten verboten wurde. Zweiteres schaffte im Jahr 2013 die Studiengebühren von etwa 500 Euro pro Student pro Semester in Bayern ab.

Deswegen ist Thomas Pickel auch zuversichtlich, dass sich eine Million Menschen mit ihrer Unterschrift für die Insekten in Bayern einsetzen werden. „Ein Freund von mir hat neulich im Zug aus Spaß 45 Personen befragt. Mehr als 50 Prozent wussten von dem Volksbegehren und wollen es auch unterschreiben“, sagt er mit leuchtenden Augen. Wichtig sei vor allem, möglichst viele Menschen in den größeren Städten wie München und Nürnberg zu motivieren. Die Wähler können ihre Stimme in den Rathäusern der Städte abgeben, mehr Informationen dazu hier. Hier in Bayreuth wollen die Summer es schaffen, rund 10.000 Stimmen für die Insekten zu sammeln.

Dafür mobilisieren sie an allen Ecken: Sie verteilen Flyer, hängen Plakate auf, sprechen mit den Menschen. „Zurzeit fahre ich mit dem Rad wahrscheinlich 40 Stundenkilometer und hetze von hier nach dort“, sagt Thomas Pickel lachend. Vor einigen Tagen hat er für eine Radioshow mit dem Pressesprecher des Bayerischen Bauernverbandes, Markus Peters, gesprochen. Die Bauern sind derzeit der wohl schärfste Gegner des Volksbegehrens. 30 Prozent Ökolandbau bis im Jahr 2030 sei nicht machbar, so die Begründung. „Das soll sich auf keinen Fall gegen die Bauern wenden. Im Gegenteil, es soll den Staat zum Umdenken und Umlenken in der Landwirtschaft bringen“, sagt Pickel.

Dass 30 Prozent ökologische Landwirtschaft sehr wohl möglich seien, sei am Beispiel Österreich abzulesen: Dort seien es mittlerweile etwa 25 Prozent. Durchgesetzt wurde das dadurch, dass etwa Kantinen von Schulen, Behörden und Firmen rechtlich dazu verpflichtet wurden, ökologisch angebaute Lebensmittel zu verwenden. „Wir zerstören die wertvollen, artenreichen Kulturflächen momentan, weil wir alles totspritzen und intensivieren“, sagt Pickel. „Das Volksbegehren ist ein verzweifelter Versuch, etwas zu ändern. Die Politik macht ja nichts, die schauen immer noch nur zu.“

Rund 44% der Landfläche Bayerns werden landwirtschaftlich genutzt, bisher sei die Agrarwirtschaft auch noch recht kleinteilig in dem süddeutschen Bundesland. Dennoch – das Artensterben ist in landwirtschaftlichen Bereichen besonders groß. Im Grunde ist aber auch den bayerischen Bauern auch klar, dass sich etwas ändern muss in Sachen Artenschutz.

Immer wieder winken Studierende am Campus Thomas Pickel zu, rufen etwas herüber oder fragen ihn etwas wegen des Volksentscheids. Er grinst unter seiner Schirmmütze hervor und freut sich, dass so viele andere sich auch für das Wohl der Natur interessieren und einsetzen. „Wir müssen unseren Kindern doch eine schöne Welt hinterlassen und nicht wie die Generationen vor uns denken „Nach uns die Sintflut“ und sich um nichts kümmern. Uns geht es darum, zukunftsfähig und nachhaltig zu sein. Wir wollen unsere Erde nicht kaputt machen!“

The post Eine Unterschrift für den Erhalt der Artenvielfalt appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The reason for his insomnia: Germany’s insects. Or, to be more precise, their rescue. In October 2017, a study caused a huge uproar, stating that there was a decline of about 75% in all insects in protected areas. “This was when we said we have to do something”, Thomas Pickel says, sipping his coffee. Together with eight other students, he founded “Summer in the City”, a club for biodiversity protection based in Bayreuth. “Over years, conservationists have tried to get the public’s attention to the species decline. They chose symbolic animals to spread the message, like the White Stork or the wolf. It’s kind of ironic that the smallest animals, the insects, are getting the attention now.”

The species decline of insects has been discussed in the media over and over ever since. Especially one kind of insects moved to the spotlight: bees. “Insects might be small, but they make up a huge part of biomass and are incredibly important. In Germany alone, there are 48.000 different animal species – 33.000 of them are insects”, Pickel says.

Meanwhile, the topic moved to the top of the discussion list. This could lead to fundamental changes: The referendum “Artenvielfalt Rettet die Bienen!” (English: “Biodiversity Save the bees!”) enables elective citizen of the federal state of Bavaria to vote for new legislations on biodiversity protection. From January 31 to February 13, they have the chance to sign the referendum in city halls all across Bavaria.

The new legislation would for example include the prohibition of pesticides in biotopes, it would strengthen organic agriculture (until 2030, 30 percent of the Bavarian agriculture should be organic) and the protection of natural water bodies. “In all other 15 federal states of Germany, there is already a protection buffer of five meters around natural water bodies. It is prohibited to farm there as fertilizer and pesticides could flow into the water and disturb spawning species”, Pickel says.

He is confident that one million people will sign the petition. “A friend recently asked 45 persons in the train if they knew about the referendum and if they would vote for it. More than 50 percent said yes”, he says, eyes shining. He thinks it is crucial to motivate especially people in big cities, like in Munich or Nuremberg. In Bayreuth, the “Summerer” how Pickel and his friends from “Summer in the city” are sometimes called, hope to collect about 10,000 votes for the insects. Find more information here.

To reach this goal, they are mobilizing all across the city, distributing leaflets, fixing posters, talking to people. “These days, I guess I am racing around on my bike with about 40 kilometers per hour”, Thomas Pickel says, laughing. A few days ago, he talked with the spokesman of the Bavarian farmers’ association in a radio show. The farmers are currently the strongest opponents of the referendum. Their main argument: 30 percent of organic agriculture are not possible to achieve until 2030. “The referendum is definitely not against the famers and their needs. On the contrary, it shall bring the state to rethink and redirect agriculture”, Pickel says.

A good example for organic agriculture is Austria: in 2017, about 24 percent of the country’s agriculture are already organic, trend rising. This has been achieved by engaging cafeterias of schools, offices and companies to use organically produced groceries. “Right now, we are destroying our biodiverse nature because we are spraying pesticides, killing everything, and intensifying the agricultural sector. The referendum is a desperate attempt to change this. Politicians are not doing anything, they are still just looking.”

In Bavaria, about 44% of the land surface are used for agriculture, with still relatively small-patched fields. Still, the species decline is especially high in agricultural areas. In general, Bavaria’s farmers know as well that something has to change in relation to biodiversity protection.

Again and again, students are waving at Thomas Pickel, calling across the campus, asking him about details on the referendum. Under his cap, he is grinning, obviously happy about the fact that so many are interested in protecting nature. “We have to leave a beautiful world for our children and stop thinking “After me, the deluge” like generations before us did, not caring about anything. It is important for us to be sustainable. We don’t want to destroy our planet!”

The post Referendum could save Bavaria’s biodiversity appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Since May 2017 the Natural History Museum of Berlin, Germany, showcases a special exhibition focusing on Macaws (Aras). Right after passing by gigantic dinosaur skeletons in the entrance of the museum, the visitor enters a room with a South American atmosphere and dozens of colorful specimens of Macaws.

From fact sheets pinned to the walls we learn that macaws face several threats. Habitat loss due to the clearing of woodland for the means of tropical wood harvesting, grazing grounds, arable land, and mining, is the most severe threat. Especially in the Amazonian and Cerrado region, where the natural habitat of the birds is lost at an immense speed. Being highly adapted to certain trees for feeding and nesting, macaws cannot easily find new homes.

Another reason for the decline in macaw populations is illegal trade and poaching. The pretty birds are very popular as pets, especially because of their intelligence and social personality. Sadly, the typical human friendly behavior of macaws is based on the lack of alternatives after the birds are taken away from their families.

As a result, many of the macaw species are listed in the IUCN red list of threatened species. The Blue-throated Macaw and the Spix’s Macaw for example are categorized as critically endangered.

Threatened macaws: How does this relate to us – to you?

The destruction of the Ara’s habitat is largely triggered by the global need for soy. Germany, for example, imports more than 6 million tonnes of soy each year and the vast majority is grown in South America where the macaws live. An estimated 2.2 million hectares of land is dedicated to the production of soybean for Germany.

Now, people assuming only vegans with their tofu and other soy based items are responsible for this high demand, are wrong. In fact, soy for tofu comes mainly from organic productions from within the European Union.

The quoted number is used to feed pigs, cows and poultry. One meal of traditional roast pork alone destroys two square metres of potential macaw habitat. According to the fact sheets at the exhibition, the entire German Federal State of Thuringia would need to be converted to arable land with soybeans to satisfy the meat industry’s demand for this fodder.

As a logical conclusion, less meat in your daily life helps to protect the lives of the beautiful macaw species in South America!

More information on the exhibition can be found here. The Natural History Museum in Berlin is definitely worth a visit. It showcases earth history, evolution, dinosaur skeletons, minerals and much more in a very informative way – and with special student price of only 5 €.

The post Macaws in Berlin: how our food choices threaten the popular exotic birds appeared first on Global Change Ecology.