Jump to content

Andrew Balmford: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 9: Line 9:
In 1999, he reported in ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' that the cost of conserving all life on earth would be approximately $320bn a year compared to the $6bn spent then.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/1999/sep/23/technology|title=The price of life|last=Radford|first=Tim|date=23 September 1999|publisher=The Guardian|accessdate=4 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=James|first=Alexander|coauthors=Kevin Gaston & Andrew Balmford|date=23 September 1999|title=Balancing the Earth's accounts|journal=Nature|volume=401|pages=323-324|url=http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v401/n6751/full/401323a0.html}}</ref>
In 1999, he reported in ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' that the cost of conserving all life on earth would be approximately $320bn a year compared to the $6bn spent then.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/1999/sep/23/technology|title=The price of life|last=Radford|first=Tim|date=23 September 1999|publisher=The Guardian|accessdate=4 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=James|first=Alexander|coauthors=Kevin Gaston & Andrew Balmford|date=23 September 1999|title=Balancing the Earth's accounts|journal=Nature|volume=401|pages=323-324|url=http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v401/n6751/full/401323a0.html}}</ref>


In 2002, he lead a research project that found that children were are to name a greater proportion of [[Pokemon]] characters than common species of British wildlife; 8 year-olds could identify 80% of Pokemon characters but only 50% of species. Balmford suggested that conservationists could create a game similar to Pokemon to encourage children to learn about the environment, saying "People tend to care about what they know."<ref name=harfield>{{cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1389192/Is-that-a-bee-a-bird-or-Pikachu.html|title=Is that a bee, a bird or Pikachu?|last=Harfield|first=Roger|date=29 March 2002|publisher=The Daily Telegraph|accessdate=7 March 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Balmford|first=Andrew|coauthors=Clegg L, Coulson T, Taylor J.|date=March 2002|title=Why conservationists should heed Pokémon|journal=Science. 29;295(5564):2367.|volume=29|issue=295|url=http://www.bioteach.ubc.ca/TeachingResources/GeneralScience/PokemonWildlife.pdf}}</ref> He also reported in ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]'' that the benefits of conserving nature far outweigh the benefits of development, by a factor of 100 to 1, due to the loss of [[ecosystem services]]. It was estimated that humanity loses about $250bn per year due to habitat destruction.<ref name="bbc">{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/sci/tech/2179291.stm|title=Nature 'pays biggest dividends'|last=Kirby|first=Alex|date=8 August 2002|publisher=BBC News|accessdate=4 April 2010}}</ref>
In 2002, he lead a research project that found that children were are to name a greater proportion of [[Pokemon]] characters than common species of British wildlife; 8 year-olds could identify 80% of Pokemon characters but only 50% of species. Balmford suggested that conservationists could create a game similar to Pokemon to encourage children to learn about the environment, saying "People tend to care about what they know."<ref name=harfield>{{cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1389192/Is-that-a-bee-a-bird-or-Pikachu.html|title=Is that a bee, a bird or Pikachu?|last=Harfield|first=Roger|date=29 March 2002|publisher=The Daily Telegraph|accessdate=7 March 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Balmford|first=Andrew|coauthors=Clegg L, Coulson T, Taylor J.|date=March 2002|title=Why conservationists should heed Pokémon|journal=Science. 29;295(5564):2367.|volume=29|issue=295|url=http://www.bioteach.ubc.ca/TeachingResources/GeneralScience/PokemonWildlife.pdf}}</ref> He also reported in ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]'' that the benefits of conserving nature far outweigh the benefits of development, by a factor of 100 to 1, due to the loss of [[ecosystem services]]. It was estimated that humanity loses about $250bn per year due to habitat destruction.<ref name="bbc">{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/sci/tech/2179291.stm|title=Nature 'pays biggest dividends'|last=Kirby|first=Alex|date=8 August 2002|publisher=BBC News|accessdate=4 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Andrew|first=Balmford|coauthors=Aaron Bruner, Philip Cooper, Robert Costanza, Stephen Farber, Rhys E. Green, Martin Jenkins, Paul Jefferiss, Valma Jessamy, Joah Madden, Kat Munro, Norman Myers, Shahid Naeem, Jouni Paavola, Matthew Rayment, Sergio Rosendo, Joan Roughgarden, Kate Trumper, R. Kerry Turner|date=August 2002|title=Economic Reasons for Conserving Wild Nature |journal=Science|volume=297|issue=5583|pages=950 - 953|url=http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/297/5583/950}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite journal|last=Andrew|first=Balmford|coauthors=Aaron Bruner, Philip Cooper, Robert Costanza, Stephen Farber, Rhys E. Green, Martin Jenkins, Paul Jefferiss, Valma Jessamy, Joah Madden, Kat Munro, Norman Myers, Shahid Naeem, Jouni Paavola, Matthew Rayment, Sergio Rosendo, Joan Roughgarden, Kate Trumper, R. Kerry Turner|date=August 2002|title=Economic Reasons for Conserving Wild Nature |journal=Science|volume=297|issue=5583|pages=950 - 953|url=http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/297/5583/950}}</ref>
<blockquote>One-third of the world's wild nature has been lost since I was a child and first heard the word 'conservation'. That's what keeps me awake at night. <sub> Andrew Balmford - 2002</sub><ref name="bbc" /></blockquote>
<blockquote>One-third of the world's wild nature has been lost since I was a child and first heard the word 'conservation'. That's what keeps me awake at night. <sub> Andrew Balmford - 2002</sub><ref name="bbc" /></blockquote>


In 2003, he lead a study which collected data on the maintenance costs of different conservation projects around the world. It was found that there was huge variation in the cost of conserving nature, ranging from $0.07 per acre to $1.37 million per acre depending on the project. Projects in the developing world were generally cheaper than those in the developed world, boding well for the protection of [[biodiversity hotspot]]s in poorer countries such as Indonesia and Madagascar. Balmford stated that it is important that the value for money of a conservation project should be taken into account as well as the number of threatened species in the region.<ref>http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17723790.300</ref>
In 2003, he lead a study which collected data on the maintenance costs of different conservation projects around the world. It was found that there was huge variation in the cost of conserving nature, ranging from $0.07 per acre to $1.37 million per acre depending on the project. Projects in the developing world were generally cheaper than those in the developed world, boding well for the protection of [[biodiversity hotspot]]s in poorer countries such as Indonesia and Madagascar. Balmford stated that it is important that the value for money of a conservation project should be taken into account as well as the number of threatened species in the region.<ref>http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17723790.300</ref>


In 2004, he published as a lead researcher a paper in ''[[PNAS]]'' which estimated that to protect 30% of the world's oceans would cost between $12bn and $14bn each year. He told the ''BBC'' that, "meeting this commitment to marine protection will require international effort on an unprecedented scale".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3806689.stm|title=$14bn cost of protecting oceans|last=Rincon|first=Paul|date=15 June 2004|publisher=BBC News|accessdate=6 April 2010}}</ref>
In 2004, he published as a lead researcher a paper in ''[[PNAS]]'' which estimated that to protect 30% of the world's oceans by making them [[marine protected area|protected areas]] would cost between $12bn and $14bn each year. He told the ''BBC'' that, "meeting this commitment to marine protection will require international effort on an unprecedented scale".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3806689.stm|title=$14bn cost of protecting oceans|last=Rincon|first=Paul|date=15 June 2004|publisher=BBC News|accessdate=6 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite doi|10.1073/pnas.0403239101}}</ref>


In 2009, a paper that Balmford co-authored was published in ''Science'' that found that the benefits gained from [[deforestation]] in the [[Amazon rainforest]] were quickly reversed. In recently deforsted areas, the [[Human Development Index]] (HDI) was higher than other regions, but once deforestation was complete and replaced by other activities, for example farming, the HDI decreased to the same as that in areas that had not been deforested. Balmford described the current situation as "disastrous for local people, wildlife and the global climate" but hoped that [[REDD]] may allow changes to occur in the future.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8095833.stm|title='Boom and bust' of deforestation |last=Black|first=Richard |date=11 June 2009|publisher=BBC News|accessdate=6 April 2010}}</ref> Another paper published in ''[[Public Library of Science|PLoS Biology]]'' found that between 1992 and 2006, the overall number of visitors to 280 protected areas in 20 countries had increased. Visitor numbers in Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America all grew significantly, while those in North America and Australasia did not change significantly. The results contrasted with an earlier study of visitor numbers to protected areas in Japan and the USA which found they had fallen consistently over a number of decades.<ref>{{cite doi|10.1371/journal.pbio.1000144}}</ref><ref>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17397-are-rich-tourists-losing-touch-with-nature.html</ref>
In 2009, a paper that Balmford co-authored was published in ''Science'' that found that the benefits gained from [[deforestation]] in the [[Amazon rainforest]] were quickly reversed. In recently deforsted areas, the [[Human Development Index]] (HDI) was higher than other regions, but once deforestation was complete and replaced by other activities, for example farming, the HDI decreased to the same as that in areas that had not been deforested. Balmford described the current situation as "disastrous for local people, wildlife and the global climate" but hoped that [[REDD]] may allow changes to occur in the future.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8095833.stm|title='Boom and bust' of deforestation |last=Black|first=Richard |date=11 June 2009|publisher=BBC News|accessdate=6 April 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite doi|10.1126/science.1174002}}</ref> Another paper published in ''[[Public Library of Science|PLoS Biology]]'' found that between 1992 and 2006, the overall number of visitors to 280 protected areas in 20 countries had increased. Visitor numbers in Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America all grew significantly, while those in North America and Australasia did not change significantly. The results contrasted with an earlier study of visitor numbers to protected areas in Japan and the USA which found they had fallen consistently over a number of decades.<ref>{{cite doi|10.1371/journal.pbio.1000144}}</ref><ref>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17397-are-rich-tourists-losing-touch-with-nature.html</ref>


===Other work===
===Other work===

Revision as of 11:37, 4 July 2010

Andrew Balmford is a Professor of conservation biology at the University of Cambridge. His research focuses on planning conservation, comparing the costs and benefits of conservation and how conservation can be reconciled with other activities.[1]

Education and career

Balmford studied for his undergraduate degree, and PhD at the University of Cambridge before becoming a research fellow at the university. He was then a research fellow at the Institute of Zoology before becoming a lecturer at Sheffield University. He returned to Cambridge in 1998 as a member of the zoology department.[2] He is currently a fellow of Clare College[3]

Research

In 1993, along with two other researchers, he investigated why the tails of birds are shaped as they are, aiming to test Charles Darwin's hypothesis that females have a preference for males with longer and more ornate tails using aerodynamic analysis. They reported that shallow forked shaped tails (such as those of the house martin) are aerodynamically optimal and that species with them had similar lengthed tails, indicating they could have developed through natural selection. In species with longer tails, males tend to have longer tails than females and which also create drag, since this is no advantage except for when courting, the authors suggested long tails may have evolved through sexual selection.[4][5]

In 1999, he reported in Nature that the cost of conserving all life on earth would be approximately $320bn a year compared to the $6bn spent then.[6][7]

In 2002, he lead a research project that found that children were are to name a greater proportion of Pokemon characters than common species of British wildlife; 8 year-olds could identify 80% of Pokemon characters but only 50% of species. Balmford suggested that conservationists could create a game similar to Pokemon to encourage children to learn about the environment, saying "People tend to care about what they know."[8][9] He also reported in Science that the benefits of conserving nature far outweigh the benefits of development, by a factor of 100 to 1, due to the loss of ecosystem services. It was estimated that humanity loses about $250bn per year due to habitat destruction.[10][11]

One-third of the world's wild nature has been lost since I was a child and first heard the word 'conservation'. That's what keeps me awake at night. Andrew Balmford - 2002[10]

In 2003, he lead a study which collected data on the maintenance costs of different conservation projects around the world. It was found that there was huge variation in the cost of conserving nature, ranging from $0.07 per acre to $1.37 million per acre depending on the project. Projects in the developing world were generally cheaper than those in the developed world, boding well for the protection of biodiversity hotspots in poorer countries such as Indonesia and Madagascar. Balmford stated that it is important that the value for money of a conservation project should be taken into account as well as the number of threatened species in the region.[12]

In 2004, he published as a lead researcher a paper in PNAS which estimated that to protect 30% of the world's oceans by making them protected areas would cost between $12bn and $14bn each year. He told the BBC that, "meeting this commitment to marine protection will require international effort on an unprecedented scale".[13][14]

In 2009, a paper that Balmford co-authored was published in Science that found that the benefits gained from deforestation in the Amazon rainforest were quickly reversed. In recently deforsted areas, the Human Development Index (HDI) was higher than other regions, but once deforestation was complete and replaced by other activities, for example farming, the HDI decreased to the same as that in areas that had not been deforested. Balmford described the current situation as "disastrous for local people, wildlife and the global climate" but hoped that REDD may allow changes to occur in the future.[15][16] Another paper published in PLoS Biology found that between 1992 and 2006, the overall number of visitors to 280 protected areas in 20 countries had increased. Visitor numbers in Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America all grew significantly, while those in North America and Australasia did not change significantly. The results contrasted with an earlier study of visitor numbers to protected areas in Japan and the USA which found they had fallen consistently over a number of decades.[17][18]

Other work

Balmford helped to establish the Cambridge Conservation Forum, a network of 1000 conservation professionals from a range of organisations, the Cambridge Conservation Initiative and the annual Student Conference on Conservation Science.[19][20]

Awards

In 2000, Balmford was awarded the Zoological Society of London Marsh Award for Conservation Biology.[21][22] In 2003, he was included on a list of the top 50 visionaries building a better world by Scientific American for his work on economic development and its impact on the environment.[23]

Family

In 2002 he had two children.[8]

References

  1. ^ "Department of Zoology - Andrew Balmford". University of Cambridge. Retrieved 6 February 2010.
  2. ^ "Conservation Science Group - Professor Andrew Balmford". University of Cambridge - Department of Zoology. Retrieved 7 March 2010.
  3. ^ "Teaching at Clare". Clare College, Cambridge. Retrieved 6 February 2010.
  4. ^ Mason, Georgia (03 April 1993). "Science: Are birds with long tails sexier?". New Scientist. Retrieved 7 March 2010. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  5. ^ Balmford, Andrew (18 February 1993). "Aerodynamics and the evolution of long tails in birds". Nature. 361: 628–631. ISSN doi:10.1038/361628a0. {{cite journal}}: Check |issn= value (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  6. ^ Radford, Tim (23 September 1999). "The price of life". The Guardian. Retrieved 4 April 2010.
  7. ^ James, Alexander (23 September 1999). "Balancing the Earth's accounts". Nature. 401: 323–324. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  8. ^ a b Harfield, Roger (29 March 2002). "Is that a bee, a bird or Pikachu?". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 7 March 2010.
  9. ^ Balmford, Andrew (March 2002). "Why conservationists should heed Pokémon" (PDF). Science. 29;295(5564):2367. 29 (295). {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  10. ^ a b Kirby, Alex (8 August 2002). "Nature 'pays biggest dividends'". BBC News. Retrieved 4 April 2010.
  11. ^ Andrew, Balmford (August 2002). "Economic Reasons for Conserving Wild Nature". Science. 297 (5583): 950–953. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  12. ^ http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17723790.300
  13. ^ Rincon, Paul (15 June 2004). "$14bn cost of protecting oceans". BBC News. Retrieved 6 April 2010.
  14. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1073/pnas.0403239101, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1073/pnas.0403239101 instead.
  15. ^ Black, Richard (11 June 2009). "'Boom and bust' of deforestation". BBC News. Retrieved 6 April 2010.
  16. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1126/science.1174002, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1126/science.1174002 instead.
  17. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000144, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.1000144 instead.
  18. ^ http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17397-are-rich-tourists-losing-touch-with-nature.html
  19. ^ "Professor Andrew Balmford". Interacademy Panel Conference on Biodiversity. Retrieved 6 April 2010.
  20. ^ "Cambridge Conservation Initiative: transforming international biodiversity conservation". Research Horizons - Cambridge University. May 2009. Retrieved 6 April 2010.
  21. ^ "Recipients of The Zoological Society of London Marsh Award for Conservation Biology" (PDF). Zoological Society of London. Retrieved 6 February 2010.
  22. ^ Swain, Harriet (24 August 2001). "Glittering prizes". Times Higher Education Supplement. Retrieved 7 March 2010.
  23. ^ Warren, Marcus (10 November 2003). "Livingstone becomes 'leading thinker'". New York: The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 6 February 2010.

External links


Valuing the arc

Are rich tourists losing touch with nature?

How to get a bigger bang for your eco buck

A life or death decision

Value of nature

Ecologists back blueprint to save biodiversity hotspots

Solving the mystery of the thinning egg shells and other conservation whodunnits


Slammed marina work was planned

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Andrew_Balmford&oldid=371687713"