We investigate whether income inequality affects subsequent growth in a cross-country sample for 1965-90, using the models of Barro (1997), Bleaney and Nishiyama (2002) and Sachs and Warner (1997), with negative results. We then investigate the evolution of income inequality over the same period and its correlation with growth. The dominating feature is inequality convergence across countries. This convergence has been significantly faster amongst developed countries. Growth does not appear to influence the evolution of inequality over time. Outline

https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/81822/1/02-28.pdf

Economic growth and income inequality

Fisheries have rarely been 'sustainable'. Rather, fishing has induced serial depletions, long masked by improved technology, geographic expansion and exploitation of previously spurned species lower in the food web. With global catches declining since the late 1980s, continuation of present trends will lead to supply shortfall, for which aquaculture cannot be expected to compensate, and may well exacerbate. Reducing fishing capacity to appropriate levels will require strong reductions of subsidies. Zoning the oceans into unfished marine reserves and areas with limited levels of fishing effort would allow sustainable fisheries, based on resources embedded in functional, diverse ecosystems.

/pdf/towards-sustainability-in-world-fisheries-26u29h5wj5.pdf

Towards sustainability in world fisheries

Background A principal function of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is to “perform regular and timely assessments of knowledge on biodiversity.” In December 2013, its second plenary session approved a program to begin a global assessment in 2015. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and five other biodiversity-related conventions have adopted IPBES as their science-policy interface, so these assessments will be important in evaluating progress toward the CBD’s Aichi Targets of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020. As a contribution toward such assessment, we review the biodiversity of eukaryote species and their extinction rates, distributions, and protection. We document what we know, how it likely differs from what we do not, and how these differences affect biodiversity statistics. Interestingly, several targets explicitly mention “known species”—a strong, if implicit, statement of incomplete knowledge. We start by asking how many species are known and how many remain undescribed. We then consider by how much human actions inflate extinction rates. Much depends on where species are, because different biomes contain different numbers of species of different susceptibilities. Biomes also suffer different levels of damage and have unequal levels of protection. How extinction rates will change depends on how and where threats expand and whether greater protection counters them. Different visualizations of species biodiversity. ( A ) The distributions of 9927 bird species. ( B ) The 4964 species with smaller than the median geographical range size. ( C ) The 1308 species assessed as threatened with a high risk of extinction by BirdLife International for the Red List of Threatened Species of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. ( D ) The 1080 threatened species with less than the median range size. (D) provides a strong geographical focus on where local conservation actions can have the greatest global impact. Additional biodiversity maps are available at www.biodiversitymapping.org. Advances Recent studies have clarified where the most vulnerable species live, where and how humanity changes the planet, and how this drives extinctions. These data are increasingly accessible, bringing greater transparency to science and governance. Taxonomic catalogs of plants, terrestrial vertebrates, freshwater fish, and some marine taxa are sufficient to assess their status and the limitations of our knowledge. Most species are undescribed, however. The species we know best have large geographical ranges and are often common within them. Most known species have small ranges, however, and such species are typically newer discoveries. The numbers of known species with very small ranges are increasing quickly, even in well-known taxa. They are geographically concentrated and are disproportionately likely to be threatened or already extinct. We expect unknown species to share these characteristics. Current rates of extinction are about 1000 times the background rate of extinction. These are higher than previously estimated and likely still underestimated. Future rates will depend on many factors and are poised to increase. Finally, although there has been rapid progress in developing protected areas, such efforts are not ecologically representative, nor do they optimally protect biodiversity. Outlook Progress on assessing biodiversity will emerge from continued expansion of the many recently created online databases, combining them with new global data sources on changing land and ocean use and with increasingly crowdsourced data on species’ distributions. Examples of practical conservation that follow from using combined data in Colombia and Brazil can be found at www.savingspecies.org and www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3zjeJW2NVk.

The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection

I Genesis, God blesses human beings and bids us to take dominion over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air, and every other living thing. We are entreated to be fruitful and multiply, to fill the earth, and subdue it (Gen. 1:28). The bad news, and the good news, is that we have almost succeeded. There is little debate in scientific circles about the importance of human influence on ecosystems. According to scientists’ reports, we appropriate over 40% of the net primary productivity (the green material) produced on Earth each year (Vitousek et al. 1986, Rojstaczer et al. 2001). We consume 35% of the productivity of the oceanic shelf (Pauly and Christensen 1995), and we use 60% of freshwater run-off (Postel et al. 1996). The unprecedented escalation in both human population and consumption in the 20th century has resulted in environmental crises never before encountered in the history of humankind and the world (McNeill 2000). E. O. Wilson (2002) claims it would now take four Earths to meet the consumption demands of the current human population, if every human consumed at the level of the average US inhabitant. The influence of human beings on the planet has become so pervasive that it is hard to find adults in any country who have not seen the environment around them reduced in natural values during their lifetimes—woodlots converted to agriculture, agricultural lands converted to suburban development, suburban development converted to urban areas. The cumulative effect of these many local changes is the global phenomenon of human influence on nature, a new geological epoch some call the “anthropocene” (Steffen and Tyson 2001). Human influence is arguably the most important factor affecting life of all kinds in today’s world (Lande 1998, Terborgh 1999, Pimm 2001, UNEP 2001). Yet despite the broad consensus among biologists about the importance of human influence on nature, this phenomenon and its implications are not fully appreciated by the larger human community, which does not recognize them in its economic systems (Hall et al. 2001) or in most of its political decisions (Soulé and Terborgh 1999, Chapin et al. 2000). In part, this lack of appreciation may be due to scientists’ propensity to express themselves in terms like “appropriation of net primary productivity” or “exponential population growth,” abstractions that require some training to understand. It may be due to historical assumptions about and habits inherited from times when human beings, as a group, had dramatically less influence on the biosphere. Now the individual deci-

/pdf/the-human-footprint-and-the-last-of-the-wild-1vhji89mdz.pdf

The Human Footprint and the Last of the Wild

▪ Abstract In this review, we discuss the ecological and evolutionary consequences of plant-herbivore interactions in tropical forests. We note first that herbivory rates are higher in tropical forests than in temperate ones and that, in contrast to leaves in temperate forests, most of the damage to tropical leaves occurs when they are young and expanding. Leaves in dry tropical forests also suffer higher rates of damage than in wet forests, and damage is greater in the understory than in the canopy. Insect herbivores, which typically have a narrow host range in the tropics, cause most of the damage to leaves and have selected for a wide variety of chemical, developmental, and phenological defenses in plants. Pathogens are less studied but cause considerable damage and, along with insect herbivores, may contribute to the maintenance of tree diversity. Folivorous mammals do less damage than insects or pathogens but have evolved to cope with the high levels of plant defenses. Leaves in tropical forests are ...

/pdf/herbivory-and-plant-defenses-in-tropical-forests-1h13lnojps.pdf

Herbivory and plant defenses in tropical forests

IN SPITE OF SIGNIFICANT recent advances in understanding how to conserve species we are failing to conserve some of the most beloved and charismatic, with severe population losses, shrinking ranges and extinctions of subspecies. The primary reason is hunting for illegal trade of highly valuable body parts, increasingly operated by sophisticated organized criminal syndicates supplying wealthy East Asian markets. Current enforcement systems were not established to tackle such crime, and weak governance, low capacity and inadequate resources facilitate the trade. To save these species this trade must be treated as serious crime, with allocation of sufficient resources, highly trained personnel, and appropriate technologies to allow it to be tackled effectively. Success in tackling this trade will necessitate commitment from governments and nongovernmental organizations and the support of civil society.

/pdf/another-inconvenient-truth-the-failure-of-enforcement-4npuursmr4.pdf

Another inconvenient truth: the failure of enforcement systems to save charismatic species

The twin threats to wildlife across the world are habitat Actions to address the problems are proceeding apace across the tropical world. More eCective enforcement of loss and hunting, but the perception of which looms larger has fluctuated over time. In the last 10 years, protected areas, partnerships with logging companies in Congo, and bans on wildlife trade in Sarawak are all however, we have come to realize that hunting is the major threat across the tropics. Ironically, given the proving successful. However to make the leap from action at a local level to action across the political and success we have had in protecting certain key areas, these areas are increasingly becoming ‘empty forests’ development arena we need more information. It is clear that levels of oCtake from tall forests are grossly (Redford, 1992). The threat posed by hunting is especially great in tropical forests, where the productivity of edible unsustainable (Robinson & Bennett, 2000), and inadequate to support even subsistence consumption by growing wildlife is extremely low. Certain groups of species are especially vulnerable to hunting (e.g. McGowan & rural human populations, let alone a commercial market. But forest edges may be more productive (Barnes, 2002), Garson, Guest Editorial, this volume), but the current scale of hunting aCects the whole biotic community. and harvests of rodents and other edge species are possibly sustainable in some areas. How hunting can be Using conservative estimates of oCtake about 28 million bay duikers, 16 million blue duikers and more than 7 managed so that productive species can be harvested whilst not hampering eCorts to conserve the more million red colobus are taken from the forests of Central Africa every year (Wilkie & Carpenter, 1999; Fa & Peres, vulnerable species is unclear even in theory, let alone in practice. We know that many people, be they hunters, 2001). Extraction of wildlife from such forests is presently six times the sustainable rate (Bennett, 2002). traders or consumers, depend on the harvest of wildlife, but we have contradictory data on what proportion of To assess the current state of knowledge and identify areas for action two related symposia, on hunting and the harvest is consumed in rural communities, and how much enters urban markets. We do not have a good the conservation of exploited species, were held at the 16th Annual Meeting of the Society for Conservation understanding of how a decline in harvest rates will aCect people’s protein consumption or what would be Biology at the University of Kent, Canterbury, UK, in July 2002. In addition to data on the scale of the problem, the economic impact of strict control of the commercial trade. There are no clear data on the ecological eCects the symposia included case studies of approaches that are starting to succeed. These symposia attracted a large caused by the large volume of unsustainable wildlife trade. There is not yet consensus on the extent to which audience and stimulated vibrant discussions. This issue of Oryx contains Forum pieces arising out of this debate. wildlife consumption is aCected by price, especially relative to domestic alternatives, nor on the complex interactions of the driving forces behind the commercial Elizabeth L. Bennett (Corresponding author) and John G. Robinson trade. Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Blvd., Bronx, New York The answers to these questions will determine con10460, USA. E-mail: liz@lizbennett.org servation actions. While there is a broad recognition that E. J. Milner-Gulland Renewable Resources Assessment Group, there is a serious conservation problem, conservation Department of Environmental Science and Technology, Royal School of Mines, Imperial College London, Prince Consort Road, London, programmes have been hampered in their design and SW7 2BP, UK. implementation by the outstanding questions. The answers are not obvious (c.f. Ling et al., this volume), and while Mohamed Bakarr Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, 1919 M Street N.W., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036, continuing our eCorts on the ground, we must simulUSA. taneously step up our eCorts, combining biological understanding (RowcliCe, this volume) with expertise from Heather E. Eves Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, 8403 Colesville Road, Suite 710, Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA. other disciplines (Robinson & Bennett, this volume). We must turn scientific knowledge into much more wideDavid S. Wilkie Wildlife Conservation Society, 18 Clark Lane, Waltham, MA 02451–1823, USA. scale action through open discussion of the success and failures of diCerent approaches, and disseminate the information much more eBcaciously to governments Manuscript accepted for publication 6 August 2002.

/pdf/hunting-the-world-s-wildlife-to-extinction-31ntvjv4an.pdf

Hunting the world's wildlife to extinction

Illegal hunting of African elephants (Loxodonta africana) for ivory is causing rapid declines in their populations. Since 2007, illegal ivory trade has more than doubled. African elephants are facing the most serious conservation crisis since 1989, when international trade was banned. One solution proposed is establishment of a controlled legal trade in ivory. High prices for ivory mean that the incentives to obtain large quantities are high, but the quantity of tusks available for trade are biologically constrained. Within that context, effective management of a legal ivory trade would require robust systems to be in place to ensure that ivory from illegally killed elephants cannot be laundered into a legal market. At present, that is not feasible due to corruption among government officials charged with implementing wildlife-related legislation. With organized criminal enterprises involved along the whole commodity chain, corruption enables the laundering of illegal ivory into legal or potentially legal markets. Poachers and traffickers can rapidly pay their way out of trouble, so the financial incentives to break the law heavily outweigh those of abiding by it. Maintaining reliable permitting systems and leak-proof chains of custody in this context is challenging, and effective management breaks down. Once illegal ivory has entered the legal trade, it is difficult or impossible for enforcement officers to know what is legal and illegal. Addressing corruption throughout a trade network that permeates countries across the globe will take decades, if it can ever be achieved. That will be too late for wild African elephants at current rates of loss. If we are to conserve remaining wild populations, we must close all markets because, under current levels of corruption, they cannot be controlled in a way that does not provide opportunities for illegal ivory being laundered into legal markets.

https://conservationaction.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Legal-Ivory-Trade-in-a-Corrupt-World-and-its-Impact-on-African-Elephant-Populations1.pdf

Legal ivory trade in a corrupt world and its impact on African elephant populations.

There is a broad consensus among the scientific and for the needs of these people. They typically lack the education, skills and cultural context to take advantage conservation communities that the ‘bushmeat crisis’ in tropical forests is not hyperbole. The annual harvest of of cash-earning jobs in plantations and industry. International assistance has tended to work against these wild species for their meat is vast: estimates are 23,500 tonnes in Sarawak (Bennett, 2002), 67,000–164,000 tonnes most marginalized of people. They lose access to their land and traditional resources, often experiencing drops in the Brazilian Amazon (Robinson & Redford, 1991), and 1–5 million tonnes in Central Africa (Wilkie & in daily protein consumption, as development initiatives open up their lands to outsiders. Lacking capital and Carpenter, 1999; Fa & Peres, 2001). Hunting rates exceed sustainable levels across large swathes of the tropics, access to markets, such people cannot switch to alternative livelihoods or food sources. Hit by the advancing and as a consequence populations of hundreds of species are going locally extinct. In addition, people whose lives development frontier and the need to engage with a cash economy, they often sell wildlife as a principal depend on wildlife are losing a significant natural resource. Across the humid tropics millions of people source of income. This harvest is rarely sustainable, exacerbating their problem. Sustainable livelihoods for depend on meat from wildlife for both food and income. For many of the poorest rural people bushmeat is not a these people become a chimera. Development assistance has also been counterluxury or something that they only turn to in times of hardship. It is a vital source of animal protein, and a productive to the goal of changing the behaviour of wild meat purchasers. Development eCorts have tended commodity that can be sold. The twin imperatives of addressing people’s needs and to focus on creating jobs for the urban and semi-urban poor: people with some education who can benefit from aspirations on the one hand, and conserving the world’s species on the other, has suggested to many a ‘silver the newly created jobs. Experience from Africa and Asia has shown that as wealth increases so does the demand bullet’: solve the bushmeat crisis by alleviating poverty in tropical countries. The logic from the perspective of for wildlife; the expanding wildlife markets in towns and cities from Libreville and Brazzaville to Bangkok, London or Washington is unassailable: poor countries and people are trapped by their immediate needs, Jakarta and Shanghai epitomize this. Historical failure does not doom future eCorts. and forced by circumstances to overuse their resources. Raising people’s incomes by providing alternative sources Development assistance undoubtedly has a role to play in solving the bushmeat crisis, but simplistic eCorts to of revenue will therefore lower harvest rates of natural resources. create jobs and increase national GDP will surely have all the expected tragic consequences. The only way out But will poverty alleviation solve the bushmeat crisis? The history of development assistance from the 1950s of this crisis will be oCered by long-term, integrated eCorts that provide alternative sources of protein and onwards is not encouraging, having fostered environmental degradation and resource depletion in less income for the rural poor, curtail the commercial trade in wildlife, secure wildlife populations in protected areas, developed countries. The impact of poverty alleviation eCorts on wildlife harvests will ultimately depend on educate hunters and buyers, and involve government, the not-for-profit and the private sectors. Unfortunately how aid is targeted and which people benefit. If wildlife harvests are to decrease to sustainable there is no ‘silver bullet’ for the twin goals of conserving wildlife across the humid tropics and preventing the levels the people whose behaviour must change are those who hunt and possibly sell wildlife, and those people whose lives now depend on wildlife from being driven further against the wall. who buy it. Those who hunt are the millions of people at the margins of the cash economy in Asia, Africa and Latin America, and whose lives are intertwined with References natural areas. These are the people who live on less than US $1 per day. Despite rhetoric to the contrary, Bennett, E.L. (2002) Is there a link between wild meat and food development assistance has traditionally failed to cater security? Conservation Biology, 16, 590–592. Fa, J.E. & Peres, C. (2001) Hunting in tropical forests. In

/pdf/will-alleviating-poverty-solve-the-bushmeat-crisis-4z8eu5ybwg.pdf

Will alleviating poverty solve the bushmeat crisis

Proboscis monkeys, endemic to the island of Borneo, are declining in Sarawak. Their mangrove and peat swamp forest habitats are being degraded or destroyed and people continue to hunt them despite their protected status. Surveys between 1984 and 1986 established the status of this monkey and its habitats in this Malaysian state. The author who participated in the surveys, receiving some financial support from the Oryx 100% Fund, discusses the results and makes recommendations for future conservation action.

/pdf/proboscis-monkeys-and-their-swamp-forests-in-sarawak-asibnd5jpz.pdf

Elizabeth L. Bennett

Papers

Another inconvenient truth: the failure of enforcement systems to save charismatic species

Hunting the world's wildlife to extinction

Legal ivory trade in a corrupt world and its impact on African elephant populations.

Will alleviating poverty solve the bushmeat crisis

Proboscis monkeys and their swamp forests in Sarawak