{"id":2773,"date":"2022-01-10T19:30:27","date_gmt":"2022-01-10T19:30:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/?p=2773"},"modified":"2022-01-12T09:38:13","modified_gmt":"2022-01-12T09:38:13","slug":"the-cinderella-cop-and-the-extinction-theme-park","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/?p=2773","title":{"rendered":"The Cinderella COP And The Extinction Theme Park"},"content":{"rendered":"

long blog – download as pdf here<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

People all over the world love nature, plants and animals.\u00a0 Online and on TV, Natural History films are a hugely popular and profitable genre as they attract family audiences. The BBC has just started public marketing of it’s new Attenborough mega-series Green Planet<\/a>. Yet the extinction of \u2018biodiversity\u2019 has struggled to be taken seriously as a political issue. In this blog I explore what it might take for campaigns to make a difference to this year\u2019s global biodiversity conference, the history and challenges of this \u2018Cinderella\u2019 political issue, and the bizarre case of Swanscombe Peninsula, which may become a test case in the UK: a biodiverse site threatened by a theme park with dinosaurs. \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

[note: some readers have questioned what ‘Cinderella’ means in this context – I meant that it’s neglected, overlooked compared to climate. Journalist Peter Greenfield called the biodiversity the ‘little sister’ COP\u00a0compared to COP26 on climate]<\/i><\/p>\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Will 2022 be the year when governments take the Nature Emergency as seriously as the Climate Emergency?\u00a0 Hopes are focussed on the 15th<\/sup> Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD15), due to take place in Kunming China, from 17 \u2013 30 May. Few commentators are optimistic about it.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

istock<\/p><\/div>\n

Ever since the 1992 Earth Summit, governments have promised effective action to stem the loss of biodiversity and then failed. Conservationists have long complained that \u2018biodiversity\u2019 is an under-resourced Cinderella issue. Communicators complain that it\u2019s not understood: \u2018biodiversity\u2019 is policy-speak not everyday language for nature. Academics identify a plethora of difficulties explaining it but overall, nature still drains away.\u00a0 Scientists fear millions of species will soon be lost.<\/p>\n

What Needs To Happen<\/strong><\/p>\n

Perhaps I am stating the obvious but it seems to me that it needs at least three things for nature even to gain the political and social traction that \u2018climate\u2019 has through international action:<\/p>\n

    \n
  • Getting governments organised. Effective international political and scientific organisation and structure connecting to national economic, land use and natural resource policy<\/li>\n
  • Enabling politicians to understand it. Translation of targets derived from science into shorthands and metrics which non-scientific domestic politicians and decision-makers can understand and communicate at least between themselves (equivalent to climate\u2019s \u2018net zero\u2019 and 1.5C \u2018safe limit\u2019 and \u2018unburnable carbon\u2019)<\/li>\n
  • \u00b7Enabling people to put pressure on politicians to act on commitments. Connection of the top-down agenda for action with bottom-up public support and pressure to protect surviving nature and enhance it, meaning that it must be visible, tangible and tractable where people live, work, rest and play, with outcomes testable through personal experience.\u00a0 This is where campaigns can make the biggest difference.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Late in coming it is, and inadequate it may be but there are signs that an inter governmental infrastructure is now being put in place, partly emulating and drawing energy from that in place for climate. Corporates, NGOs, scientists and politicians have come together in new initiatives and alliances (see Cinderella COP below). \u00a0The second problem is soluble but it\u2019s unlikely to be sorted by May, although it might just emerge from the CBD process through luck. There\u2019s not much time for the third one but it\u2019s the most realistic opportunity to take for campaigners wanting to improve on the default outcome for biodiversity\u2019s COP15.<\/p>\n

    COP15 already has a full agenda. \u00a0It\u2019s reported<\/a> that:<\/p>\n

    \u2018The 21-point draft includes targets on eliminating plastic pollution, reducing pesticide use by two-thirds and halving the rate of invasive species introductions, aimed at cutting the rate of extinctions and protecting life-sustaining ecosystems\u2019.<\/em><\/p>\n

    It\u2019s also said<\/a> that \u2018nature based solutions\u2019 \u2013 the obvious cross-over with climate \u2013 are in the draft, although president Jair Bolsanaro of Brazil opposes them and they \u2018may well be cut in the run up\u2019.\u00a0 And both the UN and a \u2018high ambition\u2019 alliance are pushing ideas such as protecting of 30% of the planet for nature by 2030 and stopping the loss of biodiversity \u00a0by 2030 (see Cinderella COP below).<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

    Planetary Boundaries<\/a> are being exceeded<\/em><\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

    Dieback of the New Forest ecosystem in the UK, <\/em>from Nature<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

    Built environment drivers of biodiversity loss<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

    Finding Campaign Targets<\/strong><\/p>\n

    There\u2019s not much to be gained by campaigners trying to push new ideas onto the agenda for CBD15.<\/p>\n

    In my view, the underlying problem for biodiversity is that politicians still assume it can be saved without having to fundamentally disrupt the way we do things.\u00a0 And if they do think it needs fundamental far-reaching change, it\u2019s not politically possible, just yet.\u00a0 This is a penny that has dropped further and faster on climate than biodiversity.<\/p>\n

    So whether or not for the conference proves a turning point will depend on whether national politicians attending it already believe they must change their domestic <\/em>economic, development and planning systems, pollution controls and use of land and the sea. That in turn will depend on manifestation of public demand and support.<\/p>\n

    If that doesn\u2019t happen CBD15 may just be a small audience spectator sport for environmentalists on zoom, with a zoo of paper tiger commitments let loose in Kunming.<\/p>\n

    The political temptation is always to agree to vague targets or those with an implementation date well into the future. At the top level \u2018biodiversity\u2019 itself is vague, generic and placeless, allowing one dimensional single metric metaphors such as \u2018moving the dial\u2019. It\u2019s easy for politicians to attend an international conference and agree we must change the trajectory on biodiversity without it translating into instrumental change on the ground, in how things work in my country, at home. \u00a0That\u2019s been the history.<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

    from<\/em><\/a> @yallah instagram<\/em><\/p>\n

    It\u2019s much harder for governments to stop something they\u2019ve already started or are accustomed to, than to agree to do something new.\u00a0 So if they do, that really means something. If I was looking for a campaign target to make a difference for CBD15, that\u2019s what I\u2019d look for: something to stop, something already happening or planned but which is incompatible with the Convention ambition that the relevant country would like to align with. <\/em><\/p>\n

    The strongest signal for politicians to receive from a campaign is not seeing opinion polls or being lobbied by experts but the experience of having to do different: whether they themselves decide that or they are forced into it.\u00a0 Seeing an unmistakable change-signal from significant others who cannot be ignored (eg expenditure of corporations or large instrumental changes in public choices and behaviours) can come a close second.<\/p>\n

    In other words whether it involves a battle or not, I suggest looking for a reversal or abandonment of an existing practice or project, rather than just promoting a target for future change.<\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

    Such objectives can be tough to achieve but it doesn\u2019t have to be huge and running across the spectrum of problems and solutions associated with biodiversity.\u00a0 It could be quite discrete but emblematic nonetheless.\u00a0 In practical campaign terms between now and May, such a stop- or save-target has several advantages:<\/p>\n

      \n
    • Availability – if the thing already exists, the campaign does not to spend a long time defining and constructing public awareness of it<\/li>\n
    • Comprehension \u2013 if it\u2019s real, physical and familiar then the public is more likely to understand it and can respond to a conflict over it by seeing who\u2019s involved without having to be educated about finer points of biodiversity and policy<\/li>\n
    • Speed – if your demand is binary enough, there is time between now and May to engage public as well as elite audiences<\/li>\n
    • Test of intent \u2013 in the run up to COP15 it should be a cogent litmus-test of true political intent and working assumptions<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      And less obviously it might be<\/p>\n

        \n
      • Crossing a Rubicon, a defining moment of decision which departs from past assumptions<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        If you try, and you win, then great.\u00a0 If you try and you lose, too bad but at least you have run the test, and you have created evidence for next time, with a lot of witnesses. Without such moments, a process like the CBD COP15 may go un-noticed by most of the public, or understood only through episodic exchanges of soundbites between biodiversity advocates and politicians rehearsing the usual arguments.<\/p>\n

        The ideal contest is an event which signals the public support and the essence of the issue, and which is extended enough for a conversation to develop, for days or weeks. Campaigns which achieve this are candidates to trigger a what theorists term a \u2018dialectical moment\u2019, a time when two conflicting \u2018truths\u2019 are resolved as society rethinks in real time and a new truth emerges. (See Final Thoughts below, on biodiversity and nature as a blank free space).<\/p>\n

        In terms of timing, for a campaign to now make an impact on politicians who go on to make an impact on COP15 it needs to get \u2018inside the loop<\/a>\u2019 and have its effect faster than the default timescales for preparation, participation, decision making and implementation through the Convention process.<\/p>\n

        All that\u2019s still fairly generic as the opportunities will vary radically from one country to another so I\u2019ll share an example I know about in the UK. \u00a0\u00a0It\u2019s a bit idiosyncratic and it\u2019s in the \u2018when in a hole, first stop digging\u2019 category.\u00a0 <\/strong>In other words stop making the problem worse, in this case by not building on an important nature site near London.<\/p>\n

        \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

        Back in 2013 the UK government put a proposal for a huge entertainment park on a \u2018fast-track\u2019 for development approval.\u00a0 It still doesn\u2019t have planning consent but if built it would destroy one of the most biodiverse places in the country, at Swanscombe Peninsula in North Kent. \u00a0Strangely, even the BBC is involved, and on the wrong side.\u00a0 It\u2019s a bizarre microcosm of what happens in the UK, a highly nature-depleted<\/a> over-developed country, when biodiversity comes up against conventional development thinking.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

        Swanscombe\u2019s Extinction Theme Park <\/strong><\/h2>\n

        \"\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

        Local campaigners Donna Zimmer, hairdresser and naturalist (left), Laura Edie, special needs teaching assistant and Councillor (centre), and Karen Lynch, right, of Save\u00a0Swanscombe Peninsula<\/a><\/i><\/p>\n

        If it was a save-nature movie plot, the conservation battle over Swanscombe Peninsula might be rejected as too far-fetched.\u00a0 A community campaign<\/a> led by a hairdresser<\/a> and a teaching assistant<\/a>, up against a plan to build a vast \u2018global standard\u2019 \u00a33.5 billion theme park, the \u2018London Resort<\/a>\u2019, promoted by London Resort Company Holdings Ltd<\/a> (LRCH).<\/p>\n

        \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

        From the Save Swanscombe Peninsula campaign Facebook page<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

        By UK standards Swanscombe is an outstanding hotspot of biodiversity.\u00a0 It has many rare plants and in an area about one and a half times the size of Regents Park, a greater number of breeding birds than any major nature reserve in south east England. \u00a0It\u2019s home to nightingales, water voles, cuckoos, otters and ravens. \u00a0Foremost among its remarkable 1700 invertebrate species, is the extravagantly named Distinguished Jumping Spider, surviving only here and on the opposite bank of the Thames.<\/p>\n

        \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

        The main habitats of Swanscombe Peninsula – from Natural England<\/em><\/p>\n

        A \u2018Nature Reserve\u2019 For Extinct Animals<\/strong><\/p>\n

        \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

        London Resort<\/a> PR artists impression of the ‘Prehistoric Nature Reserve’ to be built on Swanscombe Peninsula<\/em><\/p>\n

        Potential nemesis of the Distinguished Jumping Spider comes in the form of larger-than-life \u2018PY\u2019 Pierre-Yves Gerbeau, an ex-ice hockey player and something of a travelling salesman for outlandish attraction developments, who made his name with Disneyland Paris and as \u2018rescuer\u2019 of the controversial London Millennium Dome<\/a>.\u00a0 Gerbeau is CEO of LRCH.\u00a0 With his trademark bravado, his latest big idea for the London Resort, alongside six rollercoasters, is a \u2018Prehistoric Nature Reserve<\/a>\u2019 featuring fake dinosaurs.<\/p>\n

        \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

        P Y Gerbeau and the Distinguished Jumping Spider (spider photo – Buglife)<\/em><\/p>\n

        Principal champion of the Distinguished Jumping Spider and the other invertebrate species found on the site, is a small national UK charity called Buglife*.\u00a0 Established in 2000, its name echoes the 1998 Disney Pixar movie \u2018Bug\u2019s Life\u2019, which has inspired generations of children to \u2018like bugs\u2019, and in which ants fight for their home against a predatory swarm of gangster-style grasshoppers. Buglife has a petition<\/a> against the development.<\/p>\n

        \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

        \u201cToo Much Democracy\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

        PY\u2019s boss at LRCH is Chairman Steven Norris, a former MP and Conservative Minister, now a property developer who has twice gone public with his neo-con style<\/a> view<\/a> that there is \u201cfar too much democracy\u201d in the UK as it gets in the way of development. He\u2019s also said in a Property Week Magazine video<\/a> in 2018 that universal suffrage is a \u201cdaft idea\u201d.<\/p>\n