EL PAÍS offers the América Futura section for its daily and global informative contribution on sustainable development. If you want to support our journalism, subscribe here.
Mike Barrett (54, London) is the director of science and conservation WWF UK and co-author of the Living Planet 2022 report, a paper published last year which notes that, since 1970, globally, there has been a 69% reduction in vertebrate populations. But the decline was greater for Latin America and the Caribbean, where the figure reached 94%, surpassing the rest of the world. A blow for a region that usually stands out for its biodiversity. During his visit to Colombia, which will take him to Bogotá and Guaviare, the expert spoke with América Futura about the importance of the Amazon for this planet to remain habitable for humans.
Question. Last year, WWF's Living Planet report revealed that the reduction in monitored populations in Latin America and the Caribbean had been the most drastic, reaching 94%. What has happened in the region for us to lead that shameful position?
Answer. I would say that it is not something shameful for the region, but rather for the whole world, because the data we present in the report start from 1970. The steepest declines in average vertebrate populations since 1970 are in Latin America, but if we had data from previous decades, even previous centuries, we would see catastrophic declines in North America and Europe. The difference is that we destroyed our nature centuries ago, while now rapid destruction is taking place in Latin America. Another thing to keep in mind is that the biggest loss of biodiversity we see in the Southern Hemisphere — because it's not just Latin America — is still driven by the behavior of countries in North America and Europe. What has happened is that, because we have destroyed our own nature, we are now locating or exporting that loss of biodiversity to other parts of the world. So it's a global collective problem.
Q. With the climate crisis, it is clear that there is a greater responsibility of the countries of the North than that of the countries of the South. Does something similar happen with biodiversity loss?
A. I believe there is a responsibility at all levels: local, regional and global. But yes. We know that the reason why much of our nature is being lost, for example, in the Amazon, is because of the global consumption of raw materials, in particular, food, products such as soy. These products are being exported from the Amazon to Europe and North America or China. That is why it is not logical for the rest of the world to expect the Amazon countries to solve this crisis alone, because it will require us to change our behavior, as well as the way we consume and produce. I would argue that the first step in tackling the global biodiversity crisis is to remove deforestation-related or unsustainable raw materials from global supply chains.
Mike Barret in Bogotá.Camila Acosta
Q. President Gustavo Petro has repeatedly spoken of the debt swap for climate action. How do you see this proposal to solve issues such as the climate and biodiversity crisis?
A. I believe that, on the one hand, it is important to ensure the availability of financing to help countries overcome the crisis. But on the other hand, I think that's only part of the solution. Money for conservation is just that, money. The problem is that it is not money that has necessarily been used to tackle the problem at the source. If we only rely on the exchange of debt for nature or the mobilization of international funds for conservation, it will not be enough in itself, because the countries that actually own the footprint of nature's destruction are not being involved. They are not being required to change their behavior.
Q. Why are you visiting Colombia?
This time it was only Colombia, but I had already been to Brazil and Peru. And, well, I'm here because I know that within the Amazon the motivations that lead to deforestation are different, but I also know that the region, as such, does not recognize borders. We need solutions across the Amazon and, with WWF, as a global network, we are supporting what we call an "Amazon push", which is that, essentially, we must recognize that what is happening in the Amazon should keep us up all night. We know from science that there is a risk of approaching a tipping point as soon as the end of this decade. That's terrifyingly close. We also know that there is a political gap between commitments and action plans. The Amazon, in addition to importing from a biological point of view and from the point of view of the people who live there, matters for all global citizens because, as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says, without the Amazon there will be no possible solution to comply with the Paris Agreement. That is, to limit the increase in the planet's temperature below 1.5° by the end of the century.
Q. Is there anything that has surprised you in the good sense of Colombia?
R. It's not so much a surprise, but I've noticed a sense of opportunity. There is an incredible political window at the moment: the alliance of Presidents Lula and Petro who have pledged to tackle deforestation. The fact that we have an Amazon Summit at the end of this year and that there is a possibility that the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), will be in the Amazon, in Brazil, feels positive.
Q. And any negative surprises?
Well, again, not so much as a surprise, but I do worry about the Amazon. Despite that window of opportunity I described, there are still many people in the world who believe that saving it can only be done by being inside the Amazon, and that it is the sole responsibility of the countries that host it. In fact, that's one of the reasons we'll be launching a study, later this year, on the Amazon footprint.