Section 06 - UKOTCF

limits on production (h) and simplifies the environment
by favouring a narrow range of productive
types (i). This increases production (h), but causes
widespread pollution, soil erosion and loss of
biodiversity. It also displaces inherited diversity (j)
in the form of locally adapted types and involves
the convergent selection (k) of a narrow range of
productive types dependent on the external inputs
provided. This further simplifies the environment
and compromises the provision of natural capital
and ecosystem services (l).
The processes illustrated by Figure 3 support the
‘linkage’ model (O’Neill et al. 1998). They also
provide policymakers with a conceptual tool for
identifying ways of building restraints into economic
policies by decreasing external inputs (g),
protecting biodiversity (c, d, e) and integrating the
value of natural capital and ecosystem services into
economic processes (sensu Hindmarch et al. 2006),
rather than counting them as ‘free goods’ (see
Definitions).
Emergence of sustainable development initiatives
at a European level
The adverse environmental impacts of the CAP
experience provided a compelling argument for a
rapid realignment of farming subsidies. However,
there were also concerns that farm subsidies were
becoming too expensive and would increase with
the planned accession of the Central European
States (Schröder 2002). It was also becoming apparent
that these subsidies were beginning to complicate
world trade negotiations (Europa 2004).
These influences combined to favour an approach
to policy development that increasingly addresses
causes rather than symptoms (Figure 4). This has
helped to put the concerns of biodiversity and sustainable
development at the heart of European affairs
through a succession of initiatives, including
the European Union Biodiversity Strategy (EUBS
1998), its related Action Plans (EUBAP 2001) and
the ongoing Malahide process (EC 2006). Importantly,
it has also informed the development and
review of the European Sustainable Development
Strategy (EUSDS 2006), which now includes provisions
that will:
• Eliminate policies that are ‘incompatible with
sustainable development’ (EUSDS 2006, para.
24);
• Improve the ‘management and avoid overexploitation
of natural
resource’
(EUSDS 2006,
para. 13);
• Encourage
‘recognizing
the value
of ecosystem
services’
(EUSDS,
2006, para.
13).
Figure 4. Development of European environmental policy: schematic representation. Adapted
from Hindmarch et al. (2006).
These paradigm-shifting
provisions are
part of a highlevel
fiscal
and regulatory
framework
for sustainable
economic
growth. Over
time, this
could help to
protect the environment
and
its biodiversity
Making the Right Connections: a conference on conservation in UK Overseas Territories, Crown Dependencies and other small island communities, page 190