Nations should compete over green list to measure efforts on conservation

DMany of us know about the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s red list. This is, most simply put, a classification of animals and plants, in order of how threatened they are in the wild. But then there’s the green list- a whole new idea that the IUCN has introduced. It looks at species in terms of the positive impact of conservation on them. This doesn’t mean the species is necessarily out of danger, but that conservation has benefitted it. It helps understand conservation impact, drives pathways for further conservation and, drives home the importance of conservation. If anything, I think it also underscores that results from conservation are usually slow, multi-year if not multi-decade.

In an era where countries all over the world are debating why infrastructure is more important than the wilderness, and where climate change is devastating habitats, this green list could play another role.

It could foster competition amongst countries to feature something they’ve done well on that list. If that happens, at least we’ll see more effort on conservation, even if only on one species. We will see a habitat nurtured. Think of what might happen if Brazil decides to be on that list. How will that impact devastated ecosystems, like the Amazon? Perhaps I’m being too simple and optimistic, but when we measure good news across countries, I believe we can propel healthy competition, even perhaps with countries cooperating for joint listing. It is now upto the IUCN to make it that sought after.