BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jurek" data-source="post: 3277810" data-attributes="member: 3357">Global population is rather meaningless, because everything works on a regional scale. That population of Siberia is falling and Middle East is exploding has nothing to do with each other, because people cannot emigrate from the Middle East to Siberia.Biodiversity destruction is also not coming from population directly, but mostly forest cutting and farmland conversion, the later moderated by the efficiency of agriculture. Add governance, which determines the actual status of protected areas, and you have covered 90% of dangers to biodiversity.So it may be possible to estimate region by region, which parts of the Earth will suffer the most biodiversity loss until 2050. Western, Central and Eastern Africa would come very high, because of the high population growth, high forest destruction and very low governance (Nigerian spam, anyone?). Next would be probably mainland South-Eastern Asia and Philippines.It may be better to work on agricultural efficiency, governance and sustainable forestry, especially if population growth cannot be stopped or human population is already high. This could help Africa very much. High agricultural efficiency, forest protection and governance also explains why very densely populated Europe and North America largely keep their biodiversity.</blockquote>