In Aotearoa New Zealand, our biodiversity makes a significant contribution to global biodiversity statistics, with an estimated 80,000 species only found in New Zealand.
Humans today extract 60 billion tonnes of renewable and non renewable resources. The per capita consumption of materials has increased 15% over the last 4 years. Since 1970, the global extraction of biomass, fossil fuels, minerals, and metals have increased sixfold. Urban areas have doubled in size. Over 80% of Global Wastewater is discharged untreated into our oceans along with 300-400 tonnes of heavy metals, solvents, toxic sludges and other wastes. Plastic Pollution has increased tenfold. Over half of Argicultural Expansion between 1980 and 2000 is into tropical forests. 75% of the Terrestrial environment, 40% of the Marine Environment, 50% of the aquatic environment manifest severe impacts of degradation
Is there a risk that in trying to cover so many areas, we may dilute our overall impact or assign priority in the wrong area? Will this strategy and the associated implementation plan show business, in a language that they can understand, the opportunity that protecting and enhancing biodiversity offers to them? Or conversely does it sufficiently highlight the latent liabilities that may arise if they continue to cause environmental degradation or biodiversity loss on their business as usual trajectory?