I. The Winnersof the Blue

1997

PlanetPrize

1997Blue

PlanetDr. James E. Lovelock(U.K.)
Honorary
OxfordVisiting

Fellowof Green

Prize
Conservation International (CI)
(Headquartered in U.S.A.)

College,

University

At the 1997 Blue Planet Prize Awards Ceremony,
the opening slides conveyed a message to children to
remind us of our responsibilities
to future generations and raise the question of what each one of us
can do to leave our beautiful planet intact and habitable.

3

Their Imperial Highnesses Prince andPrincess
Akishinoat the Congratulatory
His Imperial
laureates.

Highness

PrinceAkishino

congratulates

Dr. James E. Lovelock
Planet Prize.

accepts

the 1997 Blue

Party.

theSir David John Wright, Ambassador of the United Kingdom toJapan (left), and Christopher J. LaFleur, Chargé d'Affaires adinterim of the United States to Japan (right), congratulate thelaureates.

Dr. Russell A. Mittermeier,representing
accepts the 1997 Blue Planet Prize.

The Blue
Lectures.

4

PlanetPrize

Commemorative

CI,

Prior to the awards ceremony, the award recipients meet the press.
From right: Dr. Mittermeier;Dr. Lovelock;
Chairman
Jiro
Furumoto; and Osamu Shiragami, senior executive director of theFoundation.

Profile

Dr. James

E. Lovelock

Honorary

Visiting

Fellowof Green

College,

OxfordEducationandAcademic

and

1919

Born in July in the United Kingdom.

1941

B.Sc., Chemistry,

University

1941-1961

Medical ResearchCouncil, National

Professional

University

Activities

of Manchester.
Institute for Medical Research,

London.
1948

Ph.D., Medicine,

1954-1955

Visiting Scientist, Harvard University

Medical School, U.S.A.

1955

CIBA Foundationin Aging.

1958-1959

Visiting Scientist, Yale University

1959

D.Sc., Biophysics,

1961-1964

London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Award for Research
University

Medical School, U.S.A.

of London.

Professorof Chemistry,

Baylor College of Medicine,

Universityof Houston,

U.S.A.

1964-1974

Visiting Professor, Departmentof Chemistry,

1964-1989

Visiting Professor, Department

of Cybernetics,

1974

Fellow,

1975

M.S. Tswett

1980

Award

1986

Silver Medal

1988

Norbert1990

Commander,

Royal

SocietyAward

and Prize,
Prize,

Order

AmericanPlymouthWorld

ChemicalMarineMeteorologicalof the British

Royal Netherlands

AcademyHonorary

1-,ellow, Green

1996

Volvo

Environmentof Reading, U.K.

of London.

1993-

Visitingof Houston, U.S.A.

University

for Chromatography.

for Chromatography,

Gerbier

University

Empire;Society.

Laboratory.
Association.
AmsterdamPrize

for the Environment,of Arts & Sciences.
College,

UxtordUniversity,

U.K.

Prize.

In 1957, Dr. James E. Lovelock invented the electron capture detector (ECD), a device for use
in gas chromatography that can detect tiny amounts of chemical compounds in the atmosphereand elsewhere on Earth. This device made it possible to detect halogenated compounds andnitrous oxide, even at levels of only one part per trillion (ppt), thus revolutionizing our understanding of the atmosphere and pollutants.
Dr. Lovelock used his own invention in 1970 to detect chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in
air masses over Ireland. In 1973, the ECD was used to discover the existence of CFCs in theoceans and atmosphere throughout the Atlantic region from the Antarctic to the English
Channel. The CFCs were particularly abundant in areas surrounding industrialized countries.
These discoveries eventually led to the theory that CFCs destroy stratospheric ozone.

5

In the 1960s, Dr. Lovelock was invited by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) to join one of their research teams. He became involved with theNASA program studying Mars and, while making comparisons between the atmospheres ofMars and of Earth, became interested in the special properties of the Earth's atmosphere. Dr.
Lovelock, building on his broad background in chemistry and medicine, then formulated theGaia Hypothesis, now the Gaia Theory. This hypothesis was first stated in 1972 and was later
developed through an ongoing collaboration with the eminent American biologist Lynn
Margulis.
The Gaia Hypothesis sought to describe the Earth from a comprehensive point of view,not in specialized, fragmented terms. Gaia could be understood as a control system for the
Earth and offered a new way of looking at our planetary biosphere. It developed a new way ofviewing our entire world and helped raise interest in the environment all around the globe.

6

EssayThe Evolutionof the Earth

Dr. James

E. Lovelock

June 2001

The American

scientist

AlfredLotka

publisheda small book,Physical

Biology,In it

in 1925.

he wrote.

It is not so much the organism
species and environment.

or the species that evolves,

but the entire system,

The two are inseparable.

As a follower of Alfred Lotka, I want to take his suggestion

further and consider evolution asa science that is as much about the rocks and oceans as about the living things that inhabit
them. In this view, what evolves is an Earth system that can move gradually
under an ever-warmingsun. But as it evolves, sudden changes punctuatesuch as the appearanceof oxygen, or a glaciation,

for long periods

its gradual evolution;

or a species like humans.

Evolution is alsopunctuated by external events, such as the impact of planetesimals
or the appearance of a
species like photosynthesisers,
or humans, that change the global environment. Whether internally or externallydriven, these events change the whole system—materialorganisms—neitherof them separately.

Lotka'sview of evolution

passed almost unnoticed

NASA in the 1960s began exploring

our planetary

ciplinary view of the Earth was revisited.

environment

andin his time and it was not untilneighbourhoodthat this broader, transdis-

As part of NASA's exploration

team, it led me to pro-pose in a paper in Nature in 1965 that life and its environment are so closely coupled that thepresence of life on a planet could be detected merely by analysing chemically the compositionof its atmosphere. This proposal is now part of NASA's astrobiology program and they aim touse it in the search for life on extra-solar

planets.

When we look at the Earth using one of these life detectors, we see an atmosphereapart from the noble gases, has a composition

almost wholly determined

the surface. So tightly coupled is life with the atmosphere,
all life from the Earth without changing
would rapidly—ingeologicalanything

terms—moveby the organismsthat if some catastropheelse, the atmosphere

that,
at

removedand surface chemistry

to a state similar to Mars or Venus. These are dry

planets with atmospheres that are dominated by carbon dioxide and close to the chemical equilibrium state. By contrast, we have a cool wet planet with an unstable atmosphere that somehow stays constant and always fit for life. The odds against such stability are close to infinity.
Scienceis about probabilities,

alternative:

so we are forced to consider the difficult but more probablesomething regulates the atmosphere.

What is it? It has to be something

connected

7

with life at the surface because we know that the atmospheric gases—oxygen, methane andnitrous oxide—are almost wholly biological products, while others, nitrogen and carbon dioxide, have been massively changed in abundance by organisms. Moreover, the climate depends
on atmospheric composition and there is evidence that the Earth has kept a fairly comfortableclimate ever since life began in spite of a 30% increase in solar luminosity. Together these facts
led me to propose in a 1969 paper in the Journal of the American Astronautical Society that thebiosphere was regulating the atmosphere in its own interests. Two years later, I started collaborating with the American biologist, Lynn Margulis, and we published a paper in Tellus inwhich we stated:
The Gaia hypothesis
able to maintain

This idea
beforethe organismwith them.

Theyavailable

regulation

there

the global

isms and environment
model,

can take placeenvironment.

biologists,of evolutionary
Ford Doolittle

by the organisms

was the unit of selection,

were right;

they could regulate

an evolutionary

to the views

and British

out that global

itselfas an active adaptive

controlsystemthe Earth in homeostasis.

was so contradictory

the Canadianit. They pointed

ulationviews the biosphere

Daisyworld,
on a planetself-regulation?

where

was one thatin his time. Following

organisms
Alfredhave evolved

the model,

The evolutionof organisms

tight-coupledprocessand their material

able state, appears as an emergent

I foundmyselfbecauseagreeingby themselves

to evolve

system—organ-

the whole

In 1981, I redraftedby natural

might

not long

challenged

could

environment

so thatthe hypothesisthan show
selection

have madethe Gaia hypothesis

from which self-regulationnever

In time,to do no more

evolveLotka

it wascould

But I wonderedthat was intended

that

Dawkins,

was no way for organisms

environment.

together—evolve

The model

not the Earth.

biologists
and Richard

in a responsive

had computers

was restatedasthat self-reg-been

as follows:

proceeds

as a singleof the environment

at a habit-

phenomenon.

At about the same time, Andrew Watson, Mike Whitfield and I suggested a mechanism for climate control by the Earth system, namely the biologically assisted reaction between atmospheric carbon dioxide and calcium silicate in soil and on rocks. This process could regulate
both climate and CO2at a level comfortable for plants. Soon other putative regulation mechanisms were discovered, such as the connection between ocean algae, dimethyl sulphide gas,
clouds and climate. By the end of the 1980s, there was sufficient evidence and models of the
hypothetical system to justify calling it the Gaia Theory.
The name Gaia was not popular with scientists and, as a consequence, the theory has
developed under the pseudonyms, geophysiology and Earth System Science. Because most
Earth System scientists are geologists or geochemists, the science has lacked biological wisdom. Earth System scientists included the biota in their models, but did so as if ecosystems
were passive reservoirs,like the sediments or the ocean, something unable to respond actively
to change, still less able to evolve by natural selection or include biodiversity. In the biologi-

8cal community, the Gaia Theory was almost wholly rejected, and Earth System Science wasignored so far as evolution was concerned. Then, in the mid-1990s the eminent scientist
William Hamilton became interested in the Gaia Theory. He accepted what was by then thestrong evidencethat the environment was regulated at a state comfortable for the biota. He saw
it as a challenge to explain how this could happen as a consequence of evolution through natural selection. He published with Tim Lenton one paper on the cloud algal system. Sadly,hedied shortly afterward,but his colleague,Peter Henderson, continues to model systemsof biological evolution that include the material environment.
What

Bearing

Environmental

Does
Concerns

This

New

View

and What Practicalof Evolution

Have

On

Current

Use Is It?

1) It draws our attention to the biological infrastructure of the Earth, namely microorganisms. Lynn Margulis first pointed out their significance and that they still play
an important, if not major part, in planetary regulation. Bacteria were the wholebiosphere for three-billion years before multicellular organisms like us and trees
came on the scene.
2) In the real world, organisms grow in a material environment where growth isstrongly constrained by the laws of physics and chemistry. When these constraints
are included in evolutionary biology models, it becomes possible to build a wide
range of stable model systems. Tim Lenton and Stephan Harding have separately
explored imaginary ecosystems with different environmental or species properties.
Their models offer insight into the nature of the Earth system and into the need forbiodiversity. Biodiversity is usually valued for its aesthetic or human medicinal
qualities; we think that biodiversity is an important part of planetary self-regulation.
3) We see the interglacial period that we are now in as a pathological state of the Earth
System and see the ice ages as the normal state of the Earth system. In the presentinterglacial, all of the regulation systems so far proposed appear to be in positive
feedback towards climate change. In other words, any change, either to hotter orcolder, is amplified not resisted. This applies to the mechanisms for pumping down
CO2 from the atmosphere, for cloud production by algae and fOrthe Daisyworld-likebehaviour of the boreal and tropical forests. In addition, geophysical feedbacks,
such as the effect of ice cover, are also in positive feedback. An interglacial like now
can be seen as a period when regulation has temporarily failed and certainly no time
to add more greenhouse gases or deplete biodiversity.
Manybiologists,in the midst

includingof a great

its use for agriculture.
equatorial

regions,

E.O. Wilson,

extinction
In debates

is sometimes

Normanas a consequenceon this topic,
regarded

Myers

and Peter Raven,of the denial
the greatconsiderthat we arediversityof land for naturalof organisms,

as if it were a stable naturalstate.

habitats

byespeciallyin

I wonderif instead9

we should regard the diversity of natural ecosystems
continuously

but gently, perturbed.

as an indication

Even the single environmental

that the Earth itself isvariable,temperature,isperturbed on the short time-scale of diurnal change, and through the yearly march of the seasons, to the alternation of glaciations with warm periods like now. Our models suggest thatbiodiversity

is a symptom

impor6nt

for sustenanceof perturbation

during a state of comparative

is not so much biodiversity

capacity of a healthy system to respond through diversification
ical forest and other regions under threat, destroying
species.

health.

as such, but potential

What seems

biodiversity,

when the need arises.

theIn trop-diversity will reduce the numbers of rare

Among them may be those able to flourish and sustain the ecosystem

when the next

large environmental

change takes place. The loss of biodiversity

seldom occurs alone. It is partof the destructive

process

to farmland.

of converting

naturalecosystems

It is the wholeprocess, the loss of diversity and the loss of the potential of the region to sustain biodiversity,that makes the large-scale replacement of natural ecosystems with farmland so dubious an act.
The Gaia Theory is not contrary to Darwin's
look at Darwin's evolutionary
ogists collaborate
science.

10

a new

theory. I suspect it will be some time before biologists and geol-closely enough for us to see the emergence

William Hamilton,

as Copernican,

great vision; it is like neoDarwinism,of a truly unified Earth System

in a television interview, referred to the Gaian view of evolution

but, he added, we await a Newton to explain how it works.

Lecture

Travelswith an Electron
Dr. James

CaptureDetector

E. Lovelock

This afternoon I will tell you about the invention of the Electron Capture Detector, how thissimple device helped to start the environmental movement and how, later, some of its measurements led me to the idea of the Earth as the self-regulating system, Gaia.
The Electron Capture Detector, which henceforward I will call the ECD, was invented
almost exactly41 years ago in October 1956.In those days, it was usual for scientists to make,or at least design, their own instruments. Most laboratories then had a workshop with metal
working tools, lathes and milling machines, and scientists were expected to be able to use
them. Electronic deviceswere made by hand using thermionic vacuum tubes manufactured foruse in radio and sound equipment. Because we made our own equipment, we understood its
limitations and capabilities. Such insight is denied most scientists today that use commercial
instruments without understanding what goes on inside the decorous case of their chromatograph, spectrometer or other device. The greatest advantage to come from making one's own
apparatus is that sometimes it is an invention whose novelty makes it years in advance of anything availablein the marketplace.
In 1956,I was trying to discover the cause of the damage suffered by living cells when
they were frozen. We had successfully frozen and reanimated small animals—hamsters--and
we were now moving on to see,if animals as large as a rabbit could be reanimated after freezing. I had found that most of the damage by freezing was to cell membranes. These are madeof lipid protein complexes and sensitivity to cold seemed to depend in part on the fatty acidcomposition of the lipids.
To quantify my work, I needed accurate analyses of these fatty acids. It so happened that
Archer Martin and Tony James, inventors of gas chromatography,were working in the same
institute just one floor above me. I knew that their instrument had first been used to analyse
fatty acids so I asked them if they could analyse those of my membrane lipids. They were
enthusiastic to try until I showed them the quantity I had for analysis. It was a few micrograms.
Martin said "Sorry, but we cannot do it for you. We need milligrams not micrograms. Go backand prepare a much larger sample." Then, as an afterthought one of them said, "Alternatively
you could invent a more sensitive detector than our gas density balance."
At the National Institute, it was the tradition never to read the literature, especially not
textbooks, before doing an experiment. Senior scientists warned that our job was to make theliterature not read it. It was a recipe that worked well for me. Had I read the literatureof ionisation phenomena in gases before doing my experiments, I would have been hopelessly discouraged and confused. Instead, I did some experiments. Fortunately, we were not hampered,like now, by a well-intentioned but hindering health and safety bureaucracy. Scientists who
used dangerous chemicals or radioactivematerials were expected to be personally responsible.

11

There was some risk, but I doubt if under the stifling restrictions of today I would have had thepersistence to carry on with so uncertain a project as the infant Electron Capture Detector.
I first inventedthe Argon Detector—a devicethat used excited argon atoms to ionise thevapours of organic compounds. This was the sensitivedetector that I had been seeking for fatty
acid analysis. Until the even better flame ionisation detector displaced it, it served me andmany other biochemists around the world for the analysis of minute traces of fatty acids andother lipids. Serendipitously,during the work leading to the argon detector, I discovered the
ECD. Like the argon detector, it was a simple diode ion chamber. But with the ECD, nitrogen
was the carrier gas and the chamber was polarised by only a few volts instead of the kilovolt
needed by the argon detector.

Figure

1.

The electron

capturedetector.

I was fascinated by the strangebehaviour of the ECD, but a full investigationof its scientific basis was far from that of the freezing problem I was expected to work on. It says muchabout the management of the Institute that I was allowed to spend any time on it at all. The
physics of thermal energy electrons was hardly what the physicians running the Medical
Research Council expected of me. I recall asking the director, Sir Charles Harington, " Can I
spend some of my time finding out how the ECD works?" I added, "There is no certainty that
it will be of practical use, but to me it is fascinating science." He replied "I am happy to leave
it entirely to your own judgement. This is a scientific institute, and so long as what you do isgood science, I am not much concerned about its immediate medical value."
My curiosity about the strange and anomalous behaviour of the ECD made me return
to work with it whenever there was a spare moment. In 1958, I was invited to spend a year at
Yale University by Dr. Lipsky. Here, I had the opportunity to work full-time on detectors, andby the end of 1959, was able to reduce the ECD to practice as a detector little differentfrom
those now in use. The ECD gives no response whatever to over 99.9 per cent of all organic
compounds. Those few it does detect are often of biological and medical interest. Amongthem were compoundsimportantin oxidativemetabolism,such as the acids of the Krebs cycle,
steroid and thyroid hormones, and coenzymes. It also detects substances that are poisons of
this system, such as the nitro- and halo-phenols, and it was uniquely sensitive to chemical car-12

cinogens.

It is this selectiveies. The detector
lyticalresponse

to poisonsdevicein existence.

So exquisitely

were allowed

to evaporate

somewhere

cubic-metre

samplebe detectable

anywhereotherwise
mentthat makes

was then, and still is, the mostsensitive

are wholly

acrosswholein environmental

stud-

and inexpensiveana-

we coulda weekwith a little effort

detectit in a 3-

two years

it would

to perfluorocarbons,which

or so later, and within

This extraordinary

inert and harmless,of air masses

it so usefuleasily portablethat if a few litres of a rare perfluorocarbon

in England,of the air here in Japanin the world.

sensitive,

sensitivity

has been put to use in methods

continents

and also

for mass

for tracing

transfer

the move-experimentsin theoceans.

z
E.

I

!

_

cd

•c

•

1
(1, 2 I 31(

Figure

What

Makes

2.

showing

to understandthe detector

of its operationeludedUniversityof Houston.

We foundreversible,

but also could

the 1960s

when we did this work,

the numericalbecamewhich

solution

available,

its operation.

the detectionof 1 part per trillion of the halon BCF.

it Work?

It was easy enoughstanding

Chromatogram

me untilcomputersof the detector

under-

Drs.

and Chenat theattachment

Wentworthto moleculesby the dissociation
available

was beyond

the detector

all commercial

to think

theoreticalwere not generally

equations

led to the invention

is now used in almost

but a quantitativewithand followed

and I was able to solve

I find it helpful

I workedthat the electron

be irreversible

This analysis

qualitatively,

and, because

us. By 1970,

equationsof the constant

was sometimesof the molecule.

simpleand understandcurrent

methodInof this,computers
the theoryoffor its operation,equipment.

of the detector

as a small reaction

vesselholdinga dilute

sus-

pensionof the reagent chemical
gaseous free electrons.
We often forget that the free electron
is a simple chemical
and as much a fundamental
particle of chemistry
as it is of physics.
While

I was improving

capture,seriousscientists

residues

in foodstuffs.

and trying
were

applying

It was alreadyto understandthe mechanism

the detector

known

from

of detection

by electron

analysisof pesticideto the practicalconventional

chemicalanalysisthat DDT

13

was present, at levels down to the detection limit of one part per million, in foodstuffs and in
the fat of animals and humans. Conventional wet chemistry was not well suited to the comprehensive study of pesticide distribution. A more rapid, sensitive and discriminatory method
was needed. In the United States, Watts and Klein of the FDA, and in the United Kingdom
Goulden and his colleagues at Shell, pioneered the use of the ECD. They were soon joined byanalysts worldwide, who used gas chromatographs equipped with ECDs to establish a global
database of the distribution of halogenated pesticides, and soon this data were the hard facts ofthe environmental movement. When it was realised that pesticides like DDT and Dieldrin
were distributed throughout the global environment and when it was shown that they were in
the fat of Antarctic penguins and in the milk of nursing mothers in Finland, there was a recognition that pollution was no longer just a local problem; we humans were affecting the environment on a global scale. The data about the distribution of pesticides and their poisonous
effect on birds of prey led Rachel Carson to write her seminal book, Silent Spring. A book thatwarned the world of the ultimate consequences if these chemicals continued to be used by
farmers in their unceasing battle against all forms of life that are not livestock or crops. It wasa book that was bound to affect the course of politics, and in many parts of the world, hergloomy forecast of a silent spring has come true. Not as she predicted by pesticide poisoning
alone, but simply by habitat destruction,
When I first heard that the electron capture detector was being used this way, I was
delighted.I shared with Rachel Carson her concern over damage to natural ecosystems. Someparts of the chemical industry reacted in a shameful and foolish way by trying to discredither
as a person. It did not work; in fact it made Rachel Carson the first saint and martyr for the
infant and innocent green movement. All seemed set for the green movement to lead us into aseemly and sensible way of living with the natural world. As you know, it did not happen likethis. Sadly, the environmental agenda has had to proceed at the normal slow pace of humanpolitics.
Independent

ScienceIn April 1961,I received a letter from Dr. Silberstein,Director of Space Flight Operations forNASA. It was an invitation to join with them in their exploration of the moon. We have toremember that in 1961,space flight was barely a few years old. Many scientists still looked on
it as fanciful and a waste of time and money.To me, who had grown up on science fiction, theinvitation was like a dream come true. This invitation was the spur that led me to leave a safe,
tenured, well-paid job at the National Institute for Medical Research for the uncertainties of
independence and working from home.
Soon, lunar exploration became commonplace, and the new interest was in planning an
automated laboratoryto send to Mars to look for life. In the early 1960s, not much was known
about Mars. Its surface was poorly visible through telescopes, and it was easy to imagine thatthe seasonal wave of darkening that moved across the planet was due to the growth of vegetation. My colleagues at the JPL were busy designing instruments to test for life or life-likechemicals on the Martian surface. They were trying to put into practice in an automatedformthe very procedures that they were familiar with in their own laboratories here on Earth. Some14

of these experimentsinvolved applying Martian soil to culture media to see if organismswould
grow. Others looked for metabolism to see if oxygen was produced in sunlight or CO2 in thedark. I found this detailed reductionist approach to life detection for Mars unconvincing. It
could fail to detect the presence of life for many reasons. It might not be bacterial, the experiment might land at a barren site—or Martian biochemistry might be different. I suggested thatthey try a more general experiment, such as a top-down view of the whole planet instead of a
local search at the site of landing. The experiment I proposed was simply to analyse the chemical composition of the Martian atmosphere. If the planet were lifeless, then it would be
expectedto have an atmospheredetermined by physics and chemistry alone and be close to thechemical equilibrium state. But if the planet bore life, organisms at the surface would be
obliged to use the atmosphereas a sourceof raw materials and as a depository for wastes. Sucha use of the atmosphere would change its chemical composition. It would depart from equilibrium in a way that would show the presence of life. Dian Hitchcock joined me then, andtogether we examined atmosphericevidence from the infra-red astronomy of Mars. We compared this evidence with that availableabout the sources and sinks of the gases in the atmosphere of the one planet we knew bore life, Earth. We found an astonishing differencebetween
the two atmospheres.Mars was close to chemical equilibrium and dominated by carbon dioxide, but the Earth was in a state of deep chemical disequilibrium. In our atmosphere, carbon
dioxide is a mere trace gas. The coexistence of abundant oxygen with methane and other reactive gases are conditions that would be impossible on a lifeless planet. Even the abundant
nitrogen and water are difficult to explain by geochemistry.No such anomalies are present in
the atmospheres of Mars or Venus.Their existence in the Earth's atmosphere signals the presence of living organisms at the surface. Sadly, we concluded, Mars was probably lifeless.
The first sight of the Earth from space as a dappled white and blue sphere filled our
minds with wonder and delight. We saw, for the first time, how beautiful was the Earth andbegan to regard it as an icon like those of the great religions. In a similar way, the top-downview of atmospheric chemistry gathered at JPL was for me, in scientific terms, a revelation of
the Earth. The analysis revealed the atmosphere as a gas mixture like that of the intake manifold of an internal combustion engine: oxygen and combustible gases mixed. Different fromthe exhausted, carbon dioxide dominated atmospheres of Mars and Venus. Much more thanthis, I knew that the chemical composition of the atmospherewas stable for long periods compared with the residence times of its gases. One afternoon in 1965 at the JPL in California,
when thinking about these facts, the thought came to me in a flash that such constancy required
the existence of an active control system.
Then, I lacked any idea of the nature of the control system, except that the organisms on
the Earth's surface were part of it. I learnt from astrophysiciststhat stars increase their heat output as they age and that our Sun has grown in luminosity by 25% since life began. I realised
that, in the long term, climate also might be actively regulated. The notion of a control system
involving the whole planet and the life upon it was now firmly established in my mind.
Sometime near the end of the 1960s I discussed this idea with my near neighbour, the novelist William Golding. He suggested the name Gaia as the only one appropriate for so powerfulan entity.

15

I first stated the Gaia Hypothesis in 1972 in the journal, Atmospheric Environment.My
proposal was "the biosphere interacts actively with the environment so as to hold it at an optimum of its own choosing." The proposal was based on argumentsdrawn from the atmosphericchemistry of the Earth and Mars. Soon after I began a collaboration and friendship with thebiologist Lynn Margulis that has continued to this day. Lynn, from her wide knowledge anddeep understandingof organisms—especiallymicroorganisms—putflesh on the bare bones ofmy physical chemistry.
I now realise that the early statements of the Gaia Hypothesis were misleading. Worse,
enthusiasts of the idea began to speak of the Earth as a living organism—not as we said "theEarth behaves like a living organism." These misunderstandings led to heavy criticism from
biologists that still persists 25 years later. Sharpened by these criticisms, the Gaia Hypothesis
evolved. Now, we see Gaia as a system made from the living organisms of the Earth, and fromtheir material environment,the two parts tightly coupled and indivisible. Gaia theory views theself-regulationof the Earth's climate and chemical composition as emergent properties of thesystem.
My colleague, Andrew Watson, succinctly expressed the step that distinguishes Gaia
theory from previous evolutionary theories. It lies in the tightness of the coupling between theorganismsand their physical environment.Almost everyone,he said, now accepts that life profoundly influences the environment. This is now the conventional wisdom among geochemists, and a considerable change from their view pre-Gaia. It is equally obvious, he continued, that life is influenced by and adapts to the environment. This is the older wisdom thathas prevailed throughout this century.Therefore, life and the environment are a coupled feedback system, where changes in one element will affect the other, and this may in turn feed backon the original change. The real debate is, then, how important and how tight is the coupling?
Does it, as we believe, confer new properties on the system, such as enhanced stability or
behaviour like a living organism? I see this coupling strong enough that we will not properly
understand Earth history until we think of the system as just that, a whole system, and stop trying to understand its parts in isolation from one another. Gaia theory is testable and is developing normallyin the Earth sciences, and in time will either be accepted or rejected on the evidence.
Among the insights that come from a Gaian approach is the idea that planetary life cannever be sparse. A planet with sparse life could never self-regulate. We should keep this inmind as we destroy the natural ecosystems of the Earth to provide farmland for ourselves. The
geophysical and geochemical evolution of the terrestrial planets is progressive and towards
states like those of Mars and Venus now.
Thinking about Gaia led me to explorethe natural world. I was curious to know how elements like sulphur and iodine that are scarce on the land surface, but plentiful in the oceans,
are transferred back from the sea to the land in sufficient quantities to keep the land fertile.
The opportunity to start exploring came in 1968 when we purchased a holiday cottage
in far Western Ireland on the shores of Bantry Bay. It was sited on the slopes of Hungry Hill,a small mountain of warm sandstone slabs, which looked out over the broad Atlantic. Here,during walks along the beach, I collected the different speciesof macroalgae—seaweed.I put

16

the specimens into empty jars and later examined their volatile emissions, using a simple gas
chromatograph. Summer holidays at Adrigole led serendipitously to another discovery about
the atmosphere. On days when the air drifted from the East, from Europe, it became hazy andthe visibility range fell from over 50 kilometers to less than one kilometer. I wondered if wewere seeing a polluted air mass that had travelled intact more than 1,000 kilometers to western Ireland.

FigureFigureFigure3.

4.

5.

The cottage

laboratory

in Ireland.

Clear air seen from the Adrigole

Smog seen from the Adrigole

cottage.

cottage.

17

I had the idea that it shouldor was man-made,CFCs

are uniqueby measuring
among

be possible

to decidethe levelof CFCs,chemicals

if the haze was a natural
the aerosolin the atmospherein being

propellant

phenomenon,
gases

unequivocallyin it. The

of industrial

ori-

gin. Other chemicals
have both natural as well as man-madesources. My idea was that if thehaze was pollution,
it would come from an urban industrial area and in it there would be moreof these

CFCs

sparklingthanin cleanAtlantic

clear, and I was surprised

air. On the first few

to find a small but easily

trillionof F11, in the air. A few days later, the wind

Europe.

With

it camethe haze

For in the hazy air, there

150 parts per trillion

air. So the haze was man-made.

Later investigations

1,000

and to have come frommiles

carrying

There,

this

employer

were

Atlantic

the CFCs

fumes

investigation

to tell me whatin the cleanSouthern

the exhaustsmall

I shouldFrancehavein the Earth's

back and measure

as the ship travellediodineof these

the CFCs

I wantedreleasedcycles.

Being

supportthe expedition

an independent,

were

for grant

I usedthe six-month

was so simple
voyage.

it to be photochemicalsmog, richshowedof cars

driftednearlyholidaymakers.

of European

but beingabout

in the windcuriousthe 50 parts

fromwithout

and having

per trillion

any means

for their removal?

I had anotherspeciesof the elements

quantities

to account
these

18

important,

Hemispherereasoninvestigations,

was not a deterrent,andto makesulphur

for the rate of massandtransfer

but without

and my wife agreed

tobudget.
I was able to makeit in a few days.

The total cost of the research,

40,000

Yen. But the discoveries

Figure6.

It ran without

includingthe apparapapersof the voyage

required

three Natureused on the Shackleton

to analyse

the CFCs.

their publication.

Gas chromatographof CFCor morethe world.

to makenoAmerica,acrossthe lack of support

from our housekeeping

throughoutof the smog.
as in the clear

molecular

support

50 parts per

drift of air blew frombe to travel by ship to the Southernin sufficient

I triedThe apparatus

tus, was about

if therefrom the oceanselemental

success.

failureto knowquantity,

air wasas muchtimes

and Italy, having

ended,

thethe origin

threeatmosphereto do would

the voyage.

of my idea about

the Atlantic

To find out, the only thingmeasurable

of Flt,I wondered

acrossof our holiday

and an easterlyof the millions
might

be doing,

air. Had it drifted

accumulating

shiftedand the confirmationwerein ozone,

days

for

NorthLatitude

40

20

20

40

60
South Latitude

Concentrations(partsper trillion)by volumeofCCI3F
The abundance of Fl 1 in the air and in the sea of the Atlantic Ocean
Nature, Vol. 24/, January 19, 1973

Figure7.

The abundanceof Fl 1 in the air and in the sea of the Atlantic

Ocean.

This journey of research revealed the global presence of the chlorofluorocarbons, carbon tetrachloride and methyl chloroform. In addition, I found the unexpected presence of
methyl iodide, dimethyl sulphide and carbon disulphide. It now seems that the environmental
significanceof these sulphur emissions may be as important as is that of the CFCs.
Sherry Rowland and Mario Molina used my data in their historic Nature paper. They
made public their concern about the potential of the CFCs to deplete stratospheric ozone. At
first, I was sceptical. I did not doubt the excellence of the science. Indeed, in 1974,I took samples of stratospheric air and was able to confirm the Rowland Molina hypothesis that thestratosphere was a sink for the CFCs. What I did doubt was that the 50 ppt of Fl 1, and the 80
ppt of F12, in the air in the mid-1970s were, at that time, a significant threat. It is normal in science for new hypotheses to have a hard time—as I well knew from the opposition to the Gaia
Hypothesis, and some of my scepticism came from this cause. At the time, it seemed thatmonitoring, not a ban, was needed. Looking back, I realise I was wrong to oppose an early banon the release of CFCs to the atmosphere. I underestimated the time needed for the international understanding that led to the Montreal agreement on the CFCs.
As the years went by, the need grew for comprehensive global monitoring of the CFCs.
Prinn and his colleagues suggested in 1977 that the accurate global monitoring of CFCs would
provide data from which their residence times in the atmosphere could be calculated. In 1978,
our holiday cottage at Adrigole became the site of the first station of what was to become the
GAGE global monitoring network. The success of this trial run led to the establishment of a
network of five monitoring stations in Barbados, Oregon, Samoa, Tasmania and Adrigole.
These have successfully monitored the atmosphere ever since. From the results, the probableatmosphericlifetimes of the CFCs have been calculated.
The monitoring of the CFCs made accurate measurements essential. But the calibrationof our detectors with a gas at a concentration of a few parts per trillion is easier said than done.
My personal solution to this problem was twofold. First, I calculated from first principles thenumber of electrons that had reacted with fluorocarbon in the detector. This provided anabsolute analysis and calibration was not needed. I was fairly sure that this method would not
be in error by more than 20%. It turned out later to be only 5% in error. My second step was

19

to move my home and laboratory to a remote country region close to the Atlantic Ocean. Here,I converted a barn into a 50-cubic-meter exponential dilution chamber. This chamber verified
the standards used in the first years of global monitoring.
Liss and Slater, 1974, used the Shackleton data to estimate the flux of DMS and halocarbons from the sea to the air and vice versa. Later in the 1970s, the German scientist, Andi
Andreae, made a series of careful and accurate measurements of the DMS abundance in boththe air and the sea water over many parts of the world, and, indeed, most of our knowledge ofthe distributionof this gas now is due to this careful research.
In 1986, I was invited to spend a month at the University of Washington in Seattle.
While there, I spent some time with Robert Charlson, who was interested in the significanceof cloud condensationnuclei (CCN) in the atmosphere. These are, for the most part, especiallyover the open oceans, tiny droplets of sulphuric acid and its ammonium salts. I asked him why
he was so interested in them, and his reply astonished me. Without the CCN, he said, there
could be no clouds. Of course, I knew that small droplets of pure water will always have ahigher equilibrium vapour pressure than larger droplets, but never had I put together in mymind the obvious fact that natural selection among cloud droplets would leave only the larger
ones, whichwould rapidly fall out from the air as rain. In other words, without the nuclei, there
could be no clouds as we now know them. At first I protested, saying, surely there are always
enough sea salt and other water-solubleparticles floating in the atmosphere to act as nuclei. Dr.
Charlson explainedto me that for the greater part of the Earth's surface, that is to say over the
open oceans, the numbers of sea-salt particles are too small to account for the abundance of
CCNs. There were sufficient droplets of sulphuric acid and ammonium sulphate, but there was
no way that these could have come from either industrial or volcanic sources. Where did theycome from? Such particles cannot travel far over the ocean, which means that they must be
produced locally. It was one of those happy moments in science when truth suddenly dawns.
The atmospheric oxidation of DMS could be the answer.We moved on to discuss these ideas
with Andi Andreae who knew much more about the abundance of DMS in the atmospherethan we did. Our conclusions were published in a paper in Nature in 1987. My interest in Gaia
led me to seek mechanisms for climate control. Together with Whitfield and Watson in 1983,
I had proposed the pump-down of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by biologically accelerated rock weathering as one possible mechanism. I wondered if the association between
algae in the ocean, clouds and climate could provide another. At first, it did not look like apromising candidate, but there is now strong evidence for the link between algae, clouds andclimate. Kump and I showed in 1995 that this is most evident in the cooler parts of the world
where the sea temperature is less than 12 degrees Celsius. So complex is the connection
between cloudiness and climate that it will take time to resolve. The vigour of the debate andthe worldwide research interest in DMS seems to me to indicate the value of Gaia as a different way to view the world. Whether or not it is a fact seems less important.
I hope that I have shown that science can still be a vocation, not just a career. Somethingeven that can be done at home, in the way an artist or novelistworks. Doing environmental science this way and walks through the countryside and on the seashore have kept me in touchwith the natural world. I have tried to show how the ECD influenced the development of the20

environmentalmovement and how this simple detector has taken me literally around the world
in search of new information. Similar journeys in the mind, especially those using the opportunities provided by the NASA space program, enabled me to see the world of Gaia from outside. I am blessed to have two able successors who will carry on my work, Tim Lenton andStephan Harding. It is a joyful fulfillment to have your tangible recognition through the Blue
Planet Prize.

21

Major Publications
Dr. James E. Lovelock
Books
Lovelock, J.E. Gaia: A NewLook at Life on Earth. Oxford Univ. Press, 1979.
—. The Ages of Gaia. N.Y.: W. W. Norton, 1988.
—. The Practical Science of Planetary Medicine. London: Gaia Books, 1991.
—. Homage to Gaia: The Life of an Independent Scientist. Oxford Univ. Press, 2000.
Allaby, M. and J.E Lovelock. The Great Extinction.London: Secker & Warburg, 1983.
—. The Greening of Mars. London: Andre Deutsch, 1984.
Lovelock, J.E. and A. Vittachi. Foreword in Earth Conference One. Boston: Shambala, 1989.

ArticlesAtmospheric Chemistry
Lovelock, J.E. "Air Pollution and Climatic Change." Atmospheric Environment, 5 (1971), 403-411.
— . "Atmospheric Fluorine Compounds as Indicators of Air Movements." Nature, 230, No. 5293
(1971), 379 only.
— . "Atmospheric Turbidity and CC13F Concentrations in Rural Southern England and Southern
Ireland." Atmospheric Environment, 6 (1972), 917-925.
Lovelock, J.E. and J.P. Lodge. "Oxygenin the ContemporaryAtmosphere."AtmosphericEnvironment,
6 (1972), 575-578.
Lovelock, J.E., R.J. Maggs and R.A. Rasmussen. "Atmospheric Dimethyl Sulphide and the Natural
Sulphur Cycle." Nature, 237, No. 5356 (1972), 452-453.
Lovelock, J.E., R.J. Maggs and R.J. Wade. "Halogenated Hydrocarbons in and over the Atlantic."
Nature, 241,No. 5386 (1973), 194-196.
Lovelock, J.E. "Atmospheric Halocarbons and Stratospheric Ozone." Nature, 252, No. 5481 (1974),292-294.
—. "CS2 and the Natural Sulphur Cycle." Nature, 248, No. 5449 (1974), 625-626.
Lovelock, J.E. and S.A. Penkett. "PAN over the Atlantic and the Smell of Clean Linen." Nature, 249,
No. 5456 (1974), 434.
Lovelock,J.E. "NaturalHalocarbons in the Air and in the Sea." Nature, 256, No. 5514 (1975), 193-194.
Cox, R.A., A.E.J. Eggleton, R.G. Derwent, J.E. Lovelock and A.H. Pack. "Long-Range Transport of
Photochemical Ozone in North-Western Europe." Nature, 255, No. 5504 (1975), 118-121.
Cox, R.A., R.G. Derwent, A.E.J. Eggleton and J.E. Lovelock. "Photochemical Oxidation of
Halocarbons in the Troposphere." Atmospheric Environment, 10 (1976), 305-308.
Lovelock, J.E. "Halogenated Hydrocarbons in the Atmosphere." Ecotoxicology and Environmental
Safety, 1 (1977), 399-406.
Pack, D.H., J.E. Lovelock, G. Cotton and C. Curthoys. "Halocarbon Behaviour from a Long Time
Series." Atmospheric Environment,II (1977), 329-344.
Lovelock, J.E. "Methyl Chloroform in the Troposphere as an Indicator of OH Radical Abundance."
Nature, 267, No. 5606 (1977), 32 only.
—. "PAN in the Natural Environment; Its Possible Significancein the Epidemiology of Skin Cancer."
Ambio, 6 (1977), 131-133.
—. "Epilogue." In Stratospheric Ozone and Man. Ed. F.A. Bower and R.B. Ward. 195-201. Florida:
CRC Press, 1982.
—. "The Production and Fate of Reduced Volatile Species from Oxic Environments." Atmospheric
Chemistry.Ed. E.D. Goldberg. (1982) 199-213.

22

Rasmussen, R.A. and J.E. Lovelock. "The Atmospheric Lifetime Experiment 2. Calibration." J.
Geophysical Research, 88, No. C13 (1983), 8369-8370.
Lovelock, J.E. "Atmospheric Interactions—Homogeneous Gas Reactions of C, N and S Containing
Compounds." Comment to Chapter 3 in The Major Biogeochemical Cycles and Their Interactions.
Ed. B. Bolin and R.B. Cook. N.Y.: SCOPE (1983), 112-114.
— . "Causes and Effects of Changes in Stratospheric Ozone: Update 1983." Environment, 26, No. 10(1984), 25-26.

Biochemistry
Lovelock, J.E. and J.S. Porterfield. "Blood Coagulation: Its Prolongation in Vessels with Negatively
Charged Surfaces." Nature, 167 (1951), 39.
Lovelock, J.E. and B.M. Porterfield. "Blood Clotting: The Function of Electrolytes and Calcium."
Biochem. J., 50 (1951), 415.
Lovelock, J.E. and B.M. Burch. "Blood Clotting: The Inhibition by Anions and the Function ofCalcium." Biochem. J., 48 (1951), xxxiv.
Lovelock, J.E. and R.J.W. Rees. "Possible Site and Mode of Action of Certain Lipotropic
Macromolecules in Tuberculosis." Nature, 175 (1955), 161.
Lovelock, J.E. "The Physical Instability of Human Red Blood Cells." Biochem. J., 60 (1955), 692.
James, A.T. and J.E. Lovelock. "A Preliminary Investigation of the Fatty Acid Composition of Blood
Lipids from Rabbits, Oxen, Rats and Normal and Atherosclerotic Humans." Third International
Conference on Biochemical Problems of Lipids, July 26-28,1956.
Lovelock, J.E. "The Physical Instability of Human Red Blood Cells and Its Possible Importance in theirSenescence." CIBA Foundation Colloquia on Ageing, 2 (1956), 215-232.
James, A.T., J.E. Lovelock, J. Webb and W.R. Trotter. "The Fatty Acids of the Blood in CoronaryArtery Disease." Lancet (1957), 705.
James, A.T., J.E. Lovelock and J.P.W. Webb. "The Biosynthesis of Fatty Acids by the Human Red
Blood Cell." Chem. Aspects II, July (1957) 72.
James, A.T. and J.E. Lovelock. "Essential Fatty Acids and Human Disease." British Medical Bulletin,
14 (1958), 262.
Hart, D'Arcy P. and J.E. Lovelock. "Protection of Living Cells against Acid by Certain Non-Ionic andAmphoteric Soaps." Nature, 182 (1958), 304-305.
Lovelock, J.E. and T. Nash. "A Colour Reaction for Non-Ionic and Amphoteric Soaps." Nature, 181(1958), 1263-1264.
James, A.J., J.E. Lovelock and J. Webb. "The Lipids of the Whole Blood. 1. Lipid Biosynthesis in
Human Blood In Vitro." Biochem. J., 73 (1959), 106.
Rowe, C.E., A.C. Allison and J.E. Lovelock. "Synthesis of Lipids by Different Human Blood Cell
Types." Biochem. Biophys. Acta., 41 (1960), 310.
Lovelock, J.E., A.T. James and C.E. Rowe. "The Lipids of Whole Blood. 2. The Exchange of Lipids
between the Cellular Constituents and the Lipoproteins of Human Blood." Biochem. J., 74 (1960),
137.
Lovelock, J.E. "Affinity of Organic Compounds for Free Electrons with Thermal Energy: Its Possible
Significance in Biology." Nature, 189, No. 4766 (1961), 729-732.
Lovelock, J.E., A. Zlatkis and R.S. Becker. "Affinity of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons forElectrons with Thermal Energies: Its Possible Significance in Carcinogenesis." Nature, 193, No.
4815 (1962), 540-541.
Hart, D'arcy P., J.E. Lovelock and T. Nash. "The Lethal Effect of Cotton-Wool Lipid on Tubercle
Bacilli in Acid Conditions and Its Prevention by Surface-Active Agents." J. Hyg., Camb., 60 (1962),
509.

23

Lovelock, J.E. "Reactions in the Gas Phase between Thermal Energy Electrons and Compounds
ofBiochemical Interest." Physical Processes in Radiation Biology. Ed. L. Augenstein, R. Mason and
B. Rosenberg. N.Y.: Academic Press, 1964,183-195.

Cryobiology
Polge, C. and J.E. Lovelock. "The Preservation of Bull Semen at -79°C." Vet. Rec., 64 (1952), 396.
Lovelock, J.E. "Resuspension in Plasma of Human Red Blood Cells Frozen in Glycerol." Lancet(1952), 1238.
— . "The Haemolysis of Human Red Blood Cells by Freezing and Thawing." Biochem. Biophys.Acta,
10 (1953),414.
— . The Mechanism of the Protective Action of Glycerol against Haemolysis by Freezing andThawing." Biochem.Biophys.Acta II (1953), 28.
— . "The ProtectiveAction of Neutral Solutes against Haemolysisby Freezing and Thawing." Biochem.
Journal , 56, No. 2 (1954), 265.
Lovelock, J.E. and C. Polge. "The Immobilization of Spermatozoa by Freezing and Thawing and theProtective Action of Glycerol." Biochem. J., 58 (1954), 618.
Lovelock, J.E. "Biophysical Aspects of the Freezing and Thawing of Living Cells." Proc. Roy. Soc.
Med., 47 (1954), 60.
— . "Physical Instability and Thermal Shock in Red Cells." Nature, 173 (1954), 659.
Smith, A.U., J.E. Lovelock and A.S. Parkes. "Resuscitation of Hamsters after Supercooling or Partial
Crystallizationat Body Temperatures below 0°C." Nature, 173 (1954), 1136.
Lovelock, J.E. "Biophysical Aspects of the Freezing of Living Cells." in Preservation andTransplantation of Normal Tissue, CIBA Foundation Symposium. Ed. G.E.W. Wolstenholme and
M. Cameron. London: J. & A. Churchill, 1954.
— . "Haemolysis by Thermal Shock." Brit. J. Haematology, 1 (1955), 117.
Andjus, R.K. and J.E. Lovelock. "Reanimation of Rats from Body Temperatures between 0° and1°C by
Microwave Diathermy." J. Physiol., 128 (1955), 541.
Lovelock, J.E. and A.U. Smith. "Studies on Golden Hamsters during Cooling to and Rewarming from
Body Temperatures below 0°C." Proc. Roy. Soc., 145 (1956), 427.
Lovelock, J.E. "The Denaturation of Lipid-Protein Complexes as a Cause of Damage by Freezing."
Proc. Roy. Soc. London B., 147 (1957), 427.
Austin, C.R. and J.E. Lovelock. "Permeability of Rabbit, Rat and Hamster Egg Membranes."
Experimental Cell Research, 15 (1958), 260.
Lovelock, J.E. and M.W.H. Bishop. "Prevention of Freezing Damage to Living Cells by Dimethyl
Sulphoxide."Nature, 183 (1959), 1394.
Lovelock, J.E. and A.U. Smith. "Heat Transfer from and to Animals in Experimental Hypothermia andFreezing." Ann.N.Y.Acad. Sci., 80 (1959), 487.

Geophysiology
Lovelock, J.E. "A Physical Basis for Life Detection Experiments." Nature, 207, No. 4997 (1965),
568-570.
Hitchcock. D.R. and J.E. Lovelock. "Life Detection by Atmospheric Analysis." Icarus, 7 (1967),
149-159.
Lovelock, J.E. and D.R. Hitchcock. "Detecting Planetary Life from Earth." Science Journal, April(1967), 2-4.
Henderson, W., G. Eglinton, P.G. Simmonds and J.E. Lovelock. "Thermal Alteration as a Contributory
Process to the Genesis of Petroleum." Nature, 219, No. 5158 (1968), 1012-1016.

24

Lovelock, J.E. and C.E. Giffin. "PlanetaryAtmospheres: Compositional and Other Changes Associatedwith the Presence of Life." American Astronautical Society, Advanced Space Experiments , 25
(1968), 179-193.
Lovelock, J.E. "Gaia as Seen through the Atmosphere." Atmospheric Environment, 6 (1972), 579-580.
Lovelock, J.E. and L. Margulis. "Atmospheric Homeostasis by and for the Biosphere: The Gaia
Hypothesis." Tellus, XXVI (1974), 1-10.
—. "Biological Modulation of the Earth's Atmosphere." Icarus, 21 (1974), 471-489 .
Lovelock, J.E. and L. Margulis. "Homeostatic Tendencies of the Earth's Atmosphere." Origins of Life,
5 (1974), 93-103.
Lovelock, J.E. "Thermodynamics and the Recognition of Alien Biospheres." Proc . Roy. Soc. London
B., 189(1975), 167-181.
Margulis, L. and J.E. Lovelock. "The View from Mars and Venus." The Sciences, March/April (1977),
10-13.
Margulis, L. and J.E. Lovelock. "The Biota as Ancient and Modern Modulator of the Earth's
Atmosphere." Pageoph., 116 (1978), 239-243.
Watson, A.J., J.E. Lovelock and L. Margulis. "Methanogenesis, Fires and the Regulation of
Atmospheric Oxygen." Biosystems, 10 (1978), 293-298.
— . "What Controls Atmospheric Oxygen?" BioSystems,12 (1980), 123-125.
Lovelock, J.E. "From Gas Chromatography to Gaia." Chromatographia, 16 (1982), 26-31.
Lovelock, J.E. and A.J. Watson. "The Regulation of Carbon Dioxide and Climate: Gaia orGeochemistry." Planet. Space Sci., 30, No. 8 (1982), 795-802.
Lovelock, J.E. and M. Whitfield. "The Life Span of the Biosphere." Nature, 296, No. 5857 (1982),
561-563.
Lovelock, J.E. "Gaia as Seen through the Atmosphere." In Biomineralization and Biological Metal
Accumulation.Ed. P. Westbroek and E.W. de Jong. (1983) 15-25.
Watson, A.J. and J.E. Lovelock. "Biological Homeostasis of the Global Environment: the Parable ofDaisyworld." Tellus, 35B (1983), 284-289.
Lovelock, J.E. "Gaia: The World as a Living Organism." New Scientist, 18 Dec. (1986), 25-28.
— . "Geophysiology: A New Look at Earth Science." Bulletin of American Meteorological Society, 67,
No. 4 (1986), 392-397.
—. "Ecopoiesis of Daisy World." Royal Society of Canada: Origin and Evolution of the Universe
Evidencefor Design? Ed. J.M. Robson. (1987) 153-166.
Charlson, R.J., J.E. Lovelock, M.O. Andreae and S.G. Warren. "Oceanic Phytoplankton, Atmospheric
Sulphur, Cloud Albedo and Climate." Nature, 326, No. 6114 (1987), 655-661.
Margulis, L. and J.E. Lovelock. "Gaia and Geognosy," In Global Ecology: Towards a Science of the
Biosphere. Ed. M.B. Rambler, L. Margulis and R. Fester. 1-29. San Diego: Academic Press, 1989.
Lovelock, J.E. "Geophysiology, the Science of Gaia." Reviews of Geophysics, 27, No. 2 (1989),
215-222.
— . "The First Leslie Cooper Memorial Lecture: Gaia." J. Marine Biology, 69 (1989), 746-758.
— . "Geophysiology."Royal Societyof Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, 80 (1989), 169-175 .
— . "Hands up for the Gaia Hypothesis." Nature, 344, No. 6262 (1990), 100-102.
— . "Geophysiologyof the Oceans." Ocean Margin Processes in Global Change. Ed. R.F.C. Mantoura,
J.M. Martin and R. Wollast. (Dahlem Konferenzen) 419-431. John Wiley & Sons, 1991.
— . "Geophysiological Aspects of Biodiversity." IUBS Monograph, 8. Ed. O.T. Solbrig, H.M. Van
Emden and P.G.W.J. Oordt Van. 57-70. Paris: International Union of Biological Sciences, 1992.
— . "A Numerical Model for Biodiversity."Philosophical Transactions of the Royal SocietyLondon B .,
338 (1992), 383-391.
Lovelock, J.E. and L.R. Kump. "Failure of Climate Regulation in a Geophysiological Model." Nature,369, No. 6483 (1994), 732-734.

25

Harding, S.P. and J.E. Lovelock. "Exploiter-Mediated Coexistence and Frequency-Dependent
Selection in a Numerical Model of Biodiversity." J. Theoretical Biology, 182 (1996), 109-116.
Lovelock, J.E. "A Geophysiologist's Thoughts on the Natural Sulphur Cycle." PhilosophicalTransactions of the Royal Society London B., 352 (1997), 143-147.
Lenton, T.M. and J.E. Lovelock. "Daisyworld Revisited: Quantifying Biological Effects on Planetary
Self-Regulation."Tellus, 53B, 288-305.
Lovelock, J.E. "Fresh Air." In Conservation of Resources. London: The Chemical Society, 1976,
195-203.
Allaby, M. and J.E. Lovelock. "Wood Stoves: The Trendy Pollutant." New Scientist, 13 November(1980), 420-422.
Lovelock, J.E. "Are We Destabilising the World Climate?: The Lessons of Geophysiology." The
Ecologist, 15 (1985), 52-55.
—. "Stand up for Gaia." Resurgence, 1988.
—. "I Speak for the Earth." Resurgence, 129 (1988), 18-20.
— . "Man and Gaia." In The Earth Report: Monitoring the Battle for Our Environment. Ed. E.
Goldsmith and N. Hildyard. London: Mitchell Beazley, 1988,51-64.
—. "The Greening of Science." Resurgence, 138 (1989), 12-19.
— . "Why the Forests Matter." The Financial Times, 17 June (1989).
—. "Address to the Global Forum of Spiritual and Parliamentary Leads on Human Survival." Poetry
Review,80 (1990), 1,4-6.
—. "The Earth.Is Not Fragile." In Monitoring the Environment, The Linacre Lectures, 1990-91. Ed. Sir
Bryan Cartledge. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1992.
—. "The Evolving Gaia Theory." Paper presented in September 1992 at the United Nations University,
Tokyo, Japan. 1993.
—. "For Love of Earth." National Parks Service Courier, September (1992), 5-6.
—. "Geophysiological Aspects of Biodiversity." Biodiversityand Global Change, International Unionof Biological Sciences (IUBS)Monograph No. 8. Ed. O.T. Solbrig, H.M. van Emden and P.G.W.J.
van Oordt. 1992.
—. "Gaia: Science or Myth?" New Statesman & Society, January 29,1993,37-38.
—. "A Planetary View of Nuclear Power." Japan Atomic Industrial Forum, Yokohama, Japan, April.
1993.
—. "Human Rights are Not Enough." Generalitat de Catalunya, Barcelona, January 1995.
—. "Tales of a Reluctant Instrument Maker." SelectedDetectors. Ed. R.E. Sievers. Chemical Analysis
Series, 129 (1995), John Wiley & Sons.
—. "The Self-RegulatingEarth." Osaka Prefecture University, September 1996.
—. "Midwife to the Greens: the Electron Capture Detector." Volvo Environment Prize Lecture,
Brussels, October 1996.
—. "Our Future as Seen from Mars." Forum 2000 Prague, September 1997.
—. "Travels with an Electron Capture Detector." Blue Planet Environment Prize, October 1997.
—. "A Book for All Seasons." Science, Vol. 280 (1998), 832-833.
—. "Reflections on Gaia." American Geophysical Union Chapman Conference, Valencia, June 2000.
—. "The Green Aspects of Nuclear Power." Green College, Oxford University, September 2000.
—. "The Fallible Concept of Stewardship of the Earth." St George's House, Windsor Castle, September
2000.
—. Lecture for Hiroshima, November 2000.
—. "At the Service of the Earth." Resurgence, No. 206 (2001) 7-9.
—. "A Way of Life for Agnostics?" Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 25, No. 5 (2001),40-42.
— . "An Expedition to the Days when It Began." Rev. of "Earth's Earliest Biosphere: Its Origin and
Evolution," ed. J.W. Schopf. In New Scientist, 12 April, 1984.

26

— . "Review of "The Chemical Evolution of the Atmosphere and Oceans," by H.D. Holland. Nature,
1984.
— . "A Danger to Science?" Rev. of "The Rebirth of Nature," by Rupert Sheldrake. Nature, 348 (1990),
685.
— . "Small is Wonderful." Rev. of "Engines of Creation," by K. Eric Drexler. New Scientist, 1
September, 1990.
— . "Bringing It All Back Home." Rev. of "Science Probe! the Amateur Scientist's Journal." Nature,359 (1992), 436.
— . "Elegant, Pitiless, Beautiful." Rev. of "A Journey to the Ants," by Bert Holldobler and Edward 0.
Wilson. Times Higher Education Supplement, 4 November, 1994.
— . "Models Assembled from Spare Parts." Rev. of "Vital Dust: Life as a Cosmic Imperative," byChristian de Duve. Times Higher Education Supplement, 3 November, 1995.
— . "Floral Delight." Rev. of "Flora Britannica: The Definitive New Guide to Wild Flowers, Plants andTrees," by Richard Mabey. Resurgence, No. 185,1997.
— . "Science that Moves in a Religious Way." Rev. of "The Quest for Mars: The NASA Scientists andtheir Search for Life beyond Earth," by Laurence Bergreen. The Times Higher Education
Supplement, 2 February, 2001.

Scientific Instruments
Lovelock, J.E. "Wax Pencils for Writing on Cold Wet Glassware." Nature, 155 (1945), 581.
Lidwell, O.M. and J.E. Lovelock. "Some Methods of Measuring Ventilation." J. Hygiene, 44 (1946),
326.
Lovelock, J.E. and J. Wasilewska. "An Ionisation Anemometer." Sci. Instruments, 26 (1949), 367.
Lovelock, J.E. "Fluorescence Quenching by Colloid Anions and Cations." J. the Chemical Society, 26(1951), 115-120.
Welman, W.L. and J.E. Lovelock. "An Ionization Anemometer with Omnidirectional Response." J.
Inst. Heating and Ventilating Eng., 22 (1955), 421.
Lovelock, J.E. "Diathermy Apparatus for the Rapid Rewarming of Whole Animals from 0°C andBelow." Proc. Roy. Soc., B147 (1957), 545.
— . "A Sensitive Detector for Gas Chromatography." J. Chromatography, 1 (1958), 35-46.
— . "Measurement of Low Vapor Concentrations by Collision with Excited Rare Gas Atoms." Nature,181 (1958), 1460.
— . "A Detector for Use with Capillary Tube Columns in Gas Chromatography." Nature, 182 (1958),
1663.
Lovelock, J.E. and T. Nash. " A Color Reaction for Non-Ionic and Amphoteric Soaps." Nature, 181(1958), 1263.
Lipsky, S.R., R.A. Landowne and J.E. Lovelock. "Separationof Lipids by Gas-Liquid
Chromatography." Analytical Chemistry, 31 (1959), 852-856.
Lovelock, J.E., A.T. James and E.A. Piper. "A New Type of Ionization Detector for Gas
Chromatography." Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 72 (1959), 720.
Zlatkis, A. and J.E. Lovelock. "Gas Chromatography of Hydrocarbons Using Capillary Columns andIonization Detectors." Analytical Chemistry, 31, No. 4 (1959), 620-621.
Lipsky, S.R., J.E. Lovelock and R.A. Landowne. "The Use of High Efficiency Capillary Columns for
the Separation of Certain Cis-Trans Isomers of Long Chain Fatty Acid Esters by Gas
Chromatography." J. A. Chem. Soc., 82 (1960), 431.
Lovelock, J.E. "Argon Detectors." In Gas Chromatography. Ed. R.P.W. Scott. (1960), 16-29.
Lovelock, J.E. and S.R Lipsky. "Electron Affinity Spectroscopy—A New Method for the Identificationof Functional Groups in Chemical Compounds Separated by Gas Chromatography." J. Am. Chem.

27

Soc., 82 (1960), 431-433.
Lovelock, J.E. "An Ionization Detector for Permanent Gases." Nature, 187, No. 4731 (1960), 49-50.
— . "A Photoionization Detector for Gases and Vapors." Nature, 188 (1960), 401.
— . "Affinity of Organic Compounds for Free Electronswith Thermal Energy: Its Possible Significancein Biology." Nature, 189 (1961), 729-732.
— . "IonizationMethods for the Analysis of Gases and Vapors."Analytical Chemistry, 33, No. 2 (1961),
162-178.
Lovelock, J.E. and A. Zlatkis. "A New Approach to Lead Alkyl Analysis: Gas Phase Electron
Absorption for Selective Detection." Analytical Chemistry, 33, No. 13 (1961), 1958-1959.
Lovelock, J.E. and N.L. Gregory. "Electron Capture Ionization Detectors." Gas Chromatography. Ed.
N. Brenner. Academic Press, 1962,219.
Lovelock, J.E. "Free Electrons with Thermal Energy: Their Generation for Chemical Use." Nature,195,
No. 4840 (1962), 488-489.
Simmonds, P.G. and J.E. Lovelock. "Ionization Cross-Section Detector as a Reference Standard in
Quantitative Analysis by Gas Chromatography." Analytical Chemistry, 35, No. 10 (1963),
1345-1348.
Shoemake,G.R., J.E. Lovelock and A. Zlatkis. "The Effect of Temperature and Carrier Gas on the Loss
Rate of Tritium from Radioactive Foils." J. Chromatography, 12 (1963), 314-320.
Lovelock, J.E., G.R. Shoemake and A. Zlatkis. "Sensitive Ionization Cross-Section Detector for Gas
Chromatography."Analytical Chemistry, 35, No. 4 (1963), 460-465.
Lovelock, J.E., P.G. Simmonds and W.J.A. Vandenheuvel. "Affinity of Steroids for Electrons with
Thermal Energies." Nature, 197,No. 4864 (1963), 249-251.
Lovelock, J.E. "Electron Absorption Detectors and Technique for Use in Quantitative and Qualitative
Analysis by Gas Chromatography." Analytical Chemistry,35 (1963), 474.
—. "Capture of Low-Energy Electrons in Chlorobenzene and Bromobenzene." Nature, 203, No. 4951
(1964), 1267-1268.
—. "The (W) Value Detector for High Concentrations of Gases and Vapors in Air." Analytical
Chemistry,37, No. 4 (1965), 583-584.
Wentworth, W.E., E. Chen and J.E. Lovelock. "The Pulse-Sampling Technique for the Study ofElectron-AttachmentPhenomena." J. Physical Chemistry,70 (1966), 445-458.
Lovelock, J.E., D.C. Fenimore and A. Zlatkis. "Electron Attachment Spectroscopy." J. Gas
Chromatography, August (1967), 392-394.
Simmonds, P.G., D.C. Fenimore, B.C. Pettitt, J.E. Lovelock and A. Zlatkis. "Design of a Nickel-63
Electron Absorption Detector and Analytical Significance of High-Temperature Operation."
Analytical Chemistry,39, No. 12 (1967), 1428-1433.
Lovelock, J.E. "Analysis by Gas Phase Electron Absorption." In Gas Chromatography. Ed. C.L.A.
Harbourn. 1968,95-108.
Lovelock, J.E., K.W. Charlton and P.G. Simmonds. "The Palladium Transmodulator: A New
Component for the Gas Chromatograph." Analytical Chemistry, 41 (1969), 1048-1052.
Warren, B.C.H. and J.E. Lovelock. "The W-Value Detector. Determination of Oxygen and Anaesthetic
Vapours in Expired Air." Ciba Foundation Symposium on Gas Chromatography in Biology andMedicine. Ed. R. Porter. (1969) 65-69.
Lovelock, J.E., P.G. Simmonds and G.R. Shoemake. "The Palladium Generator-Separator—A
Combined Electrolytic Source and Sink for Hydrogen in Closed Circuit Gas Chromatography."
Analytical Chemistry,42 (1970),969-973.
Lovelock, J.E., P.G. Simmonds, G.R. Shoemake and S. Rich. "Palladium Devices for Gas
Chromatography." J. Chromatographic Science, 8 (1970),452-457.
Simmonds, P.G., G.R. Shoemake and J.E. Lovelock. "Palladium-Hydrogen System: Efficient Interface
for Gas Chromatography-MassSpectrometry. Analytical Chemistry, 42 (1970), 881-885.

28

Lovelock, J.E., P.G. Simmonds and G.R. Shoemake. "Rare Gases of the Atmosphere: Gas
Chromatography Using a Thermal Conductivity Detector and a Palladium Transmodulator."
Analytical Chemistry, 43 (1971), 1958-1961.
Lovelock, J.E., R.J. Maggs and E.R. Adlard. "Gas-Phase Coulometry by Thermal Electron
Attachment." Analytical Chemistry, 43 (1971), 1962-1965.
Maggs, R.J., P.L. Joynes, A.J. Davies and J.E. Lovelock. "The Electron Capture Detector — A New
Mode of Operation." Analytical Chemistry, 43 (1971), 1966-1971.
Lovelock, J.E. "The Electron Capture Detector: Theory and Practice." J. Chromatography, 99 (1974),
3-12.
—. "Solute Switching and Detection by Synchronous Demodulation in Gas Chromatography." J.
Chromatography, 112 (1975), 29-36.
Thomsen, E.L. and J.E. Lovelock. "A Continuous and Immediate Method for the Detection of SF6 andOther Tracer Gases by Electron Capture in Atmospheric Diffusion Experiments." Atmospheric
Environment, 10 (1976), 917-920.
Simmonds, P.G., A.J. Lovelock and J.E. Lovelock. "Continuous and Ultrasensitive Apparatus for the
Measurement of Air-Borne Tracer Substances." J. Chromatography, 126 (1976), 3-9.
Dwight, E.J., E.A. Lorch and J.E. Lovelock. "Iron-55 as an Auger Electron Emitter: Novel Source for
Gas Chromatography Detectors." J. Chromatography, 116 (1976), 257-261.
Lovelock, J.E. and A.J. Watson. "Electron Capture Detector: Theory and Practice, II." J.
Chromatography, 158 (1978), 123-138.
Lovelock, J.E. "The Electron Capture Detector—A Personal Odyssey." CHEMTECH, Sep. (1981),
531-537.
Lovelock, J.E. and G.J. Ferber. "Exotic Tracers for Atmosphere Studies." Atmospheric Environment,
16, No. 6 (1982), 1467-1471.
Lovelock, J.E. "Ultrasensitive Chemical Detectors." Applied Atomic Collision Physics. Ed. H.S.W.
Massey, E.W. McDaniel and B. Bederson. 5 (1982), 1-30.
—. "Electron Capture Sulfur Detector: Reduced Sulfur Species Detection at the Femtomole Level."
Analytical Chemistry, 60 (1988), 812-816.

Transfer of Respiratory Infection
Bourdillon, R.B., O.M. Lidwell and J.E. Lovelock. "Sneezing and Disinfection by Hypochlorites."
British Medical Journal (1942), 42.
Lovelock, J.E., O.M. Lidwell and W.F. Raymonds. "Aerial Disinfection." Nature, 153 (1944), 20.
— . "Vaporization of Lactic Acid as an Aerial Bactericide." Nature, 153 (1944), 743.
Lovelock, J.E. "Aerial Bactericides."Nature, 156 (1945), 782.
Dumbell, K.R., J.E. Lovelock and E.J Lowbury. "Handkerchiefs in the Transfer of Respiratory
Infection, 1." Lancet, 255 (1948), 183.
Bourdillon, R.B., O.M. Lidwell and J.E. Lovelock. "Technique of Bacterial Killing Tests." Studies in
Air Hygiene, Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's
Stationery Office, 1948.
Lovelock, J.E. "The Quantitative Estimation of Chemical Bactericides in Very Low Aerial
Concentration." Studies in Air Hygiene, Medical Research Council Special Report Series,No. 262.
London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1948.
Lidwell, O.M. and J.E. Lovelock. "The Use of Hypochlorities for Air Disinfection." Studies in Air
Hygiene, Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's
Stationery Office, 1948.
Lidwell, O.M., J.E. Lovelock and W.F. Raymond. "Propylene Glycol as an Air Disinfectant." Studies
in Air Hygiene, Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's

29Stationery Office, 1948.
—. "Lactic Acid as an Air Disinfectant." Studies in Air Hygiene, Medical Research Council Special
Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1948.
Lovelock, J.E. "Aliphatic Hydroxy Carboxylic Acids as Air Disinfectants." Studies in Air Hygiene,
Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's Stationery
Office, 1948.
Lidwell, O.M. and J.E. Lovelock. "Behaviour of Disinfectant Vapours after Dispersal in Air." Studies
in Air Hygiene, Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's
Stationery Office, 1948.
Lovelock, J.E. "Aerial Disinfection by Substances Vaporized at Room Temperature." Studies in Air
Hygiene, Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's
Stationery Office, 1948.
—. "Killing on the Culture Plates during Tests of Air Disinfectants." Studies in Air Hygiene, Medical
Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1948.
Lidwell, O.M. and J.E. Lovelock. "Simple Vaporizersfor Aerial Disinfectants." Studies inAir Hygiene,
Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's Stationery
Office, 1948.
— . "Certain General Features in Air Disinfection by Chemicals." Studies in Air Hygiene, Medical
Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1948.
Lovelock, J.E. and W.F. Raymond. "Airborne Bacteria in a Mess Room and Disinfection by Lactic
Acid, Hydroxy Methylbutyric Acid and Ultraviolet Light." Studies in Air Hygiene, Medical
Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1948.
Bourdillon, R.B., O.M. Lidwell, J.E. Lovelock and W.F. Raymond. "Airborne Bacteria Found in
Factories and Other Places: Suggested Limits of Bacterial Contamination." Studies inAir Hygiene,
Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's Stationery
Office, 1948.
Lidwell, O.M. and J.E. Lovelock. "Disinfection by Hypochlorous Acid in Air Raid Shelters." Studies
in Air Hygiene, Medical Research Council Special Report Series, No. 262. London: Her Majesty's
Stationery Office,1948.
Bourdillon, R.B., O.M. Lidwell and J.E Lovelock. "The Efficiency of Various Types of Masks inTrapping Bacteria Emitted from the Mouth." 1948.
Dumbell, K.R. and J.E. Lovelock. "Handkerchiefs in the Transfer of Respiratory Infection." Lancet, 2(1949), 777.
Lovelock, J.E. The Properties and Use of Aliphatic Hydroxy Carboxylic Acids in Aerial Disinfection.
Thesis. 1949.
Andrewes, C.H., J.E. Lovelock and T. Sommerville. "An Experiment on the Transmission of Colds."
Lancet, 260 (1951), 25.
Lovelock, J.E., J.S. Porterfield, A.T. Roden, T. Sommerville and C.H. Andrews. "Further Studies on the
Natural Transmission of the Common Cold." Lancet (1952), 657.

30

Profile

Conservation International(CI)

History
1987
1989
1990

1991

1992

1994

1995
1996

1997

CI established by Peter A. Seligmann, the current chairman and CEO.
Dr. Russell A. Mittermeier joined CI as president.
First hotspot map published.
First RAP expedition conducted.
Tagua Initiative launched.
Debt-for-nature agreement signed with Madagascar (US$5 million).
First Regional Priority Setting Workshop held in Amazonia.
Dept-for-natureagreement signed with Mexico (US$4 million).
CI's GeographicInformation System (CISIG) released. This system is availableinfour languages and used in more than 350 institutions in 27 countries.
CI participated,in Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit.
CI held its first Asia-Pacific region Conservation Priority-Setting Workshop in
Papua New Guinea.
RAP expedition to Peru recorded six new species of butterflies, eight orchids, twobeetles and other important new findings.
First Marine RAP Expedition conducted to the Indispensable Reefs region of theSolomon Islands.
Formal RAP course launched to train local field biologists.
Bolivia created the 1.9-million-hectareMadidi National Park, largely as a result of
attention focused on the region through CI's RAP expeditions.
Internet network created to link 25 international biosphere reserves.
CI's RAP expeditions and long-term Peru Program led to establishment of
325,000-hectare Bahuaja-Sonene National Park.
Owing to major efforts by CI and Brazilian partner-organization IESB, theGovernment of the State of Bahia created the 7,000-hectare Serra do Conduru
State Park, doublingthe area protected in this criticallyendangeredhotspot region.
CI published Reinventingthe Well,a volume highlighting the importance of "bestpractices" in the oil and gas industry.

Conservation International (CI) is a private, nonprofit organization that was established in
1987 with the goals of conserving global diversity and demonstrating that human beings areable to live harmoniously with nature. CI was founded by Peter A. Seligmann, the organization's current chairman and chief executive officer. The organization's president is Dr. Russell
A. Mittermeier. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., CI is active in 24 countries with an international staff of nearly 400 experts in biology, forestry, conservation planning, marketing and31

product development, economics, law and other areas. CI carries out many of its conservation
programs through partnerships with international organizations that include the United
Nations and World Bank, as well as with governments, research institutes, local nongovernmental organizations(NGOs), and major corporations.CI's activitiesinclude the identificationof conservationpriorities, areas of the world that are particularlyrich in biodiversity and underimminent threat of destruction. CI uses the term "hotspots" to describe these areas. Throughthe use of cutting-edge biological research and its Rapid Assessment Program (RAP), CI
quickly collects and analyzes data on potentially important sites.
Since its establishment, CI has set out to develop positive examples of people coexisting with natural habitats. The organization's activities, which are based on world-class scholarship and research, help developing countries pursue economic development while maintaining biological diversity through multifaceted efforts solidly grounded in economic theory,advanced scientific methods and respect for cultural differences.

32

EssaySetting
Megadiversity

Priorities

for Saving Life on Earth:

Countries,

Hotspots,

Dr. Russell
Cristina

and Wilderness

Areas

A. Mittermeier
G. Mittermeier

Cyril F. Kormos
July 2001

At the outset of the new millennium, our planet unfortunately faces a wide range of increasingly pressing environmental problems: from global warming and ozone layer depletion, totoxic waste disposal,persistent pesticides,acid rain and a host of other pollution issues impacting our air, water and soils.However,as critical as it is to address these problems,Conservation
International believes that one environmentalissue surpasses all others in terms of magnitude,
urgency and long-term significance. That is the loss of our planet's biological diversity.
Biological diversity is the sum total of life on Earth, the wealth of species, ecosystems, andecological processesthat, after all is said and done, makes our living planet what it is—the only
place in the universe where we know with certainty that life exists. This diversity is not only
essential as our living natural resource—ourbiological capital in the global bank—but doubly
important because its loss is an irreversibleprocess. We have, or can develop, technologicalsolutions to combat most other environmental ills, especially the so-called "brown" issues
mentioned above. In many cases, we simply lack the political will or the economic incentives
to put them into place. However,once a species of plant or animal goes extinct, it is gone forever and will never be seen again. We now face not only the loss of individual species, but theloss of entire communitiesand ecosystemson which we, as living creatures, ultimately depend
for our own survival.
With so many issues to confront, in so many different scenarios, and with so little timeremaining in which to act, the challenge of conserving biodiversity may at times seem overwhelming. Given the seriousness of the threats to natural environments from expanding populations, development and other pressures, the question even emerges as to whether we canstill have a significant impact on biodiversity losses, especially in the tropical regions of theworld. Indeed, we have already lost well over half of the world's tropical forests, and we arepotentially at the beginning of an extinction episode unlike anything seen since the loss of thedinosaurs some 65-million years ago. The only difference between this and the previous five
major extinctions being that this one would be driven not by cosmic events, but by the actions

33

of a single species—our own.
Conservation International believes strongly that it is not too late to save biologicaldiversity,and that we can in fact have a major impact. To be successful in this task, however,
we must be very strategic. We must first recognize that biological diversity is by no means
evenly distributed over the surface of our planet, and that much of it is concentrated in a relatively few biologically rich regions that are often under severe threat. We must, therefore, set
clear priorities for conservation action in these regions. To be successful, we must also establish strong partnershipswithin the conservation community,and with other key actors, such as
local communities and the private sector.In addition, we must bring to bear a level of funding
and global support at least two orders of magnitude beyond what has been invested thus far.
The essential task of priority setting can be carried out in a variety of ways, but toConservationInternational it has always been essentialthat biodiversity conservationbe based
first and foremost on biological data. Thus, we first seek to determine where the greatest
species and ecosystem diversity is to be found, and then to focus on those areas with the highest levels of endemic species. Species that are found only in a particular place and nowhere
else. Endemic speciestend to be restricted in range and specialized in terms of habitat requirements. A growing body of research indicates that they are the most heavily impacted byhuman-induced changes to the environment, and therefore the first to be lost.
We have used three different kinds of priority setting: the megadiversity country concept, threatened biodiversityhotspots and major tropical wilderness areas. The megadiversity
country concept recognizes that, of all the countries on Earth, only a small handful account fora major portion of life on Earth, including terrestrial, freshwater and marine life. Dr. Russell
Mittermeier first developed this concept in 1988, based on a preliminary analysis of primate
conservation priorities. In looking at where the majority of the world's primates were to befound, Dr. Mittermeier discovered that only four countries in the world, Brazil, Madagascar,Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire), accounted for two thirdsof all primate species. These countries also had the highest levels of endemism, with 100% ofMadagascar's 55 different kinds of lemurs being endemic, and levels of endenni.smin Brazil
and Indonesia being on the order of 100%. Subsequentanalysis of other mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, plants and selected groups of insects led to the conclusion that 17 countries
qualified for megadiversity status, with Brazil, Indonesia and Colombia topping the list, followed by Australia, Peru, Mexico, Madagascar, China and nine others. This study resulted ina book, entitled Megadiversity:Earth's BiologicallyRichestNations, published in 1997by the
Mexican cement company, CEMEX, and Agrupacion Sierra Madre, a Mexican non-governmental organization. The findings in this book indicated that these 17 countries by themselves
accounted for more than two-thirds of all life forms and for the vast majority of tropical rainforests, coral reefs and other priority systems. The conclusion is obvious: we must focus mostof our attention on the richest and most diverse countriesroughly in proportion to the diversity
they contain, and we cannot leave them out of any strategy, regardless of how difficult it may
be to include some of them.
The second and most important of our priority-setting approaches is that of the threatened biodiversityhotspots. This concept was first developed in 1988 by British ecologist Dr.

34

Norman Myers, and was adopted and has been used by Conservation International and the
MacArthur Foundation since 1989.In 1996, Conservation International carried out a detailed
reanalysis of the concept to bring it up-to-date and to determine its validity and usefulness forthe new millennium. This process reaffirmed the value of the hotspots concept and validated
Myers's earlier list, but also substantially expanded upon it.
Among the most important new additions were quantitative criteria for hotspot countries. Endemism was considered the most important criterion, and plants, in this case vascularplants, which make up the vast majority of the Plant Kingdom, were chosen as the main groupof organisms to determine whether or not an area qualified as a hotspot, primarily because
most other terrestriallife forms depend on them to some degree. Data on plant endemism werecombined with data on total plant diversity (all species found in a particular area, including
both endemics and non-endemics) and complementedwith data on diversity and endemism for
four vertebrate groups (birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians). Data on these groups werethen used to refine our understanding of the importance of the hotspots, to set priorities and toprovide rankings among the hotspots themselves. Thus, to qualify as a hotspot, an area must
contain 0.5% of the global total of vascular plants (estimated at 300,000 species), or 1,500
species, as endemics.
The second major criterion for hotspot status, applied as a second layer of analysis afteran area had qualified on the basis of plant endemism, was degree of threat. In order to be
included on the list on the basis of this criterion,an area must have lost 70% or more of its original natural vegetation, leaving 30% or less in intact condition. The threat criterion enabled us
to distinguish between areas with high diversity and endemism under severe threat(Madagascar and the Philippines) and those with equal or higher diversity and endemism but
still largely intact, the so-calledmajor tropical wilderness areas (Amazonia, the Congo forestsof Central Africa and New Guinea) that are the focus of the third of our major priority-setting
approaches.
In all, a total of 25 hotspots were identified for the terrestrial realm. These include five(20%) that are exclusively tropical rainforest; seven (28%) that include both tropical rainforest and tropical dry forest; another three (12%) with tropical rainforest, tropical dry forest andother non-forest elements (including desert scrubland or grassland formations); five (20%) thatare Mediterranean-type ecosystems; three (12%) that consist of temperate forest and grasslands; one (4%) that is a mix of tropical dry forest, woodland savannas and open savannas;andone (4%) that is mainly an arid region. Of particular note is the emergence of the five
Mediterranean-type systems as major priorities. These regions, which include the Cape
Floristic Province of South Africa, Southwest Australia, Central Chile, the California Floristic
Province, and by far the most diverse, the Mediterranean itself, are characterized by cool wet
winters and hot, dry summers. They exhibit very high plant diversity and endemism. Indeed,
what remains intact in these five areas accounts for only 0.2% of Earth's land surface, yet it ishome to an astounding 26,743 endemic plants, 9% of the global total. Humans have also longimpacted these Mediterranean-typesystems, especiallythe Mediterranean basin, because they
provide excellent climates for human habitation.
Together, the hotspots once occupied a land area of 17,541,969 km2, or 11.8% of the35

planet's land surface—roughlyan area the size of Russia. Cumulatively,they have lost 88% of
this area, meaning that only 2,127,908 km2, or 12% of the original extent, remains intact. This
represents just 1.4 % of the land surface of the planet, a relatively small area that is equivalent
to the American states of Alaska and Texas combined, or about four times the area of France.
Our study indicates that this small portion of Earth's land surface has within it, as
endemics, an astounding 133,199 vascular plant species, or 44.4% of all the world's plants.
Representation of vertebrates in the hotspots is comparably impressive. Our results indicatethat there are 9,681 endemic non-fish vertebrates in the hotspots, representing 35.4% of the
global total. Level of vertebrate endemism varies, from the birds, which have 2,746 endemic
species (27.6%) found only in hotpots, to the amphibians, which have a staggering 2,572
species, or 53.8% of the global total. Mammals totaled 1,406 endemic species, or 29.2%, andreptiles somewhat higher at 2,957 endemic species, or 37.8% of the global total.
The overall conclusions of the hotspots analysis are simple and obvious. If we have
44.4% of all plants and 35% of all non-fish vertebrates endemic to just 1.4% of Earth's land
surface, and if this same 1.4% is under the most severe threat, then it is only logical to focus asignificant portion of our attention on these areas in the next few decades, and especially overthe next two to five years. To put it even more strongly,the hotspots are fundamental to preventing a mass extinction crisis in the early part of this new millennium. If we fail to act inthese areas and lose that 1.4% of the land surfaceof the planet, we will lose, at the very least,
those plants and animals that are found nowhere else than in the hotspots—even if all of efforts
in other parts of the world are successful.Without decisiveaction in the hotspots, major extinctions are inevitable.
Our final priority-setting approach is the major tropical wilderness areas approach,which seeks to complement the hotspots by looking at high-biodiversity areas (again mainlyin the tropics) that are at the opposite end of the threat spectrum. Whereas the hotspots consistof heavily exploited and often highly fragmented ecosystems greatly reduced in original extent(usually between 4% and 25% remaining), the major tropical wilderness areas are still largely
intact (over 75% of original vegetationcover remaining) and have very low human population
density (less than 5 people/km2).These wilderness areas have enormous importance as storehouses of biodiversity,as major watershed protection areas, and as controls against which we
can measure the management of the more degraded hotspots. They are also often the lastplaces where indigenous people have any hope of maintaining their traditional lifestyles. And
they are likely to assume increasing recreational, aesthetic and spiritual value on an ever more
overcrowdedplanet. Furthermore, since they are still under far less human pressure than thethreatened hotspots (although the pressures on them are mounting rapidly), the "opportunity
cost" of conservation is much lower in these areas. In other words, large-scale conservation
set-asidescan be achieved at far lower financial cost than in the areas where little remains andthreats are high.
Few such wilderness areas have managed to persist in our rapidly changing world. The
principal ones being in the Guayana Shield region encompassing Suriname, Guyana, French
Guiana, Venezuela and adjacent parts of Brazil; in a large area of upper Amazonian Brazil,
Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia; in a substantial portion of the Congolese forest

36

block/CongoRiver Basin in Central Africa; and on most of the island of New Guinea and adjacent, smaller Melanesian islands (Solomon Islands, New Britain, New Ireland and Vanuatu).
The major tropical wilderness areas will be the subject of the third book in this CEMEX series
to appear in 2001.
To the question of whether or not we can still have a significant impact on biodiversity
losses, ConservationInternational answers that, despite the significant challenges,we are optimistic. Success will depend on maintaining a very strategicfocus on priority regions and building the alliances necessary to pursue conservation in these areas. However, given the strong
support accorded to the concept of threatened biodiversity hotspots by the scientific community, in particular at a conference entitled "Defying Nature's End" sponsored by Conservation
International in Pasadena in 2000, there is every indication that this strategic focus and partnership approach will be maintained. Thus, we firmly believe that by concentrating most of
our efforts on these priority areas, we can turn today's conservation dreams into tomorrow's
conservation realities.

37

Lecture

Biodiversity
A Global

Conservation:

Challenge,
Dr. Russell

President,

A Global

Priority

A. Mittermeier

Conservation

International

As we take our first steps into a new millennium, our planet and our species face some of themost severe threats that we have ever encountered. Amazingly, these are not only geopolitical,
like the risk of nuclear war, the spread of terrorism, or other issues that have been preoccupying us since the 20th century, but rather environmental.Our planet currently faces many different environmental stresses, such as overpopulation in the developing world, over-consumption in the developed countries (and increasingly in the richer developing countries aswell), global warming, ozone layer depletion, toxic waste disposal, erosion, air, soil and waterpollution, and a number of others. Although many of these so-called "brown" environmental
issues are more evident and may appear more urgent to our increasingly urban global society,
we believethat there is one environmentalissue that surpasses all others in terms of long-term
significance, and that is loss of our planet's biological diversity. This biodiversity, simply
defined, is "the sum total of life on Earth," that wealth of species, ecosystems and ecologicalprocesses that makes our living planet what it is; it's our living resource base, our biologicalcapital in the global "Bank," and most importantly,its loss is an irreversible process.
We already have, or can develop technological "fixes" to most of our "brown" environmental problems, and sometimes lack only the economicincentive or political will to put theminto place, but biodiversity loss is a different story. Once a species of animal or plant goesextinct,it is gone foreverand will never be seen again, and we now face not just the loss of individual species, but the degradation and eventual loss of entire communities and ecosystems
upon which we ourselves ultimately depend for our own survival.
One example that indicates mass extinctionepisodes may already be in progress is provided by the "declining amphibian phenomenon,"a global trend in which certainrare frogs andother amphibians with restricted ranges are going extinct, and more common species are
becoming rare or appearing with a number of mutations and genetic defects. The golden toad
(Bufoperiglens) from a tiny area of cloud forest in Costa Rica is symbolic of this phenomenon, and has not been seen in the wild for the past decade. Regardless of all our other accomplishments,the one critical measure by which future generationswill judge our success,or lackthereof, as a society as we start this new millennium will be whether or not we have the capacity to maintain the same healthy and diverse livingplanet that we were born into during the lastcentury.
The mission of our organization,Conservation International,is to conserve our planet's

38

biological diversity, and demonstrate that people and Nature can live harmoniously, and wehave dedicated ourselves to achieving this complex objective. Some of the critical issues that
we face in conserving biodiversity include the fundamental role of setting clear priorities, andthe need for rapid action in the field in the remote areas where so much of our planet's biodiversity is still found.

How Much Do We Know about Life on Our Planet?
In terms of the most critical issues in biodiversity conservation,it is important to recognize that
we are still amazingly ignorant as a culture about the rest of life on this planet. Scientists havethus far described only about 1.4- to 1.8-million species of plants, animals and microorganisms, yet estimatesof total planetary diversityrun as high as 10-million,30-million or even one
hundred million or even more species. If we look at the complex ecological interactions thatexist between and among these different species, something that really is just in its infancy asa science, our ignorance is several orders of magnitude greater. We can send spaceships to thefarthest reaches of our solar systems, and indeed spend more in the United States in a single
space probe to Mars, with the rationale of seeking extraterrestrial life, than we have spent on
the ground in the past decade doing biodiversity research. We put millions of bits of information on tiny computer-chips,develop extremely sophisticated and complex information superhighways; and we have global institutions like the WorldBank and the various United Nations
agencies that invest hundreds of millions of dollars towards achieving the worthy,but poorly
defined goal of sustainable development.
In spite of this, we still do not know, to within two orders of magnitude, how many otherspecies of organisms share our planet with us. Trying to achieve sustainable development
based on natural resources use in the face of such ignorance is rather like trying to construct
one of those Martian space probes with nothing more than a few pieces of scrap metal, a hammer and a few rusty nails. Put another way, our wonderful technologically sophisticated 21st
century society is in many ways still in the Dark Ages in terms of our understanding of the restof life on Earth.
To give you an example of this ignorance from my personal perspective,we can look at
nonhuman primates, whose study and survival have been cornerstones of my own quarter-century career in wildlife conservation. Although it's not that surprising, we still haven't catalogued all the tiny beetles of the tropical rainforest canopy, all the microorganismslivingin our
soil, or all the strange creatures far down in the deep ocean trenches, but one would think that
we would at least know all our closest living relatives. Nonetheless, even with primates muchremains to be learned. In 1992, I described a species of marmoset from the central Brazilian
Amazon, and another just this year, again from the Amazon. Including these marmosets, 10
new monkeys have been discovered in Brazil since 1990,bringing the total number of primate
species to 79. With 25 percent of all known species, Brazil has the greatest diversity of primates in the world. And my Brazilian colleagues have several more new forms that await scientific description.
Over the past decade in Madagascar, eight new species of lemur have been described,
and several others have been rediscovered after not having been seen for more than a century.

39

So our ignorance of biodiversity is not limited to insects and microorganisms, but extends
across the board to all forms of life.
We are similarlyignorant of the true values of biodiversity,the many goods and services
that it already provides and that it has the potential to provide in the future, a nascent sciencethat in some quarters is referred to as valuation of biodiversity. We talk vaguely about the
future potentialthat the rainforests and the oceanshave for new medicines and new agricultural
products, we have some notion that the wild relatives of crop plants are important in maintaining genetic diversity and resistance to disease, and we can place economic value on a small
number of forest products like timber, rubber, rattan and Brazil nuts that regularly enter into
international commerce.
However, the vast majority of biodiversity use at regional, local and household levels
throughout the tropics and the rest of the world remains largely unrecognized and unmeasured, and never enters into the national income accounts. The importance of forests in protecting watersheds and the enormous value of wetlands, though generally recognized, also
remains largely unassessed in economic terms, although a recent study that placed a value ofseveral trillion dollars per year on watersheds clearly indicated the magnitude of importancethat living ecosystems represents to us.
The value that biodiversity and natural ecosystems provide us in terms of recreation isstarting to be measured and recognized, especially in the enormous growth of ecotourism inrecent years, but the subtle aesthetic and spiritual benefits they provide remain poorly understood. We are so far behind in capacity to value biodiversity that we do not even have in place
the metrics by which this kind of analysis could be done. Clearly, much more is needed in theimmediate future.
In trying to conserve global biodiversity and put a brake on spasms of extinction
impending or already under way, two things concern us in particular. The first of these is .thetime frame under which we are operating and the other is the need to set priorities. Using tropical rainforests as an example, we have already lost on the order of 60% of all primary rainforest that existed at the beginning of this century; as if that were not bad enough, the situation
in a number of countries is far more serious, with as much as 97% lost in certain parts of theworld. At current rates of destruction in some of these areas, we have at best five to 10 years
to halt these trends and save at least some representativeremnants of what once existed.
Where

to Begin? The ImportanceAlso of great importanceof Setting

Priorities

is the need to set priorities. Biodiversity

is by no means evenly dis-tributed over the surface of the planet and certain regions and certain countries
higher concentrations
Internationalof life than others. Rather than trying to do everything,simply have far
Conservation

decided early on in its history that it would focus its limited resources

areas that are richest in biodiversity
Our principal priority-setting

on thoseand also under the most severe threat.
approachis based on a concept developed

by British ecol-ogist Norman Myers in two scientific papers published in 1988 and 1990. Myers recognizedthat a modest number of hotspot ecosystems
tropical40

forest areas, accounted

covering a small total land area, most often in

for a high percentageof global biodiversity.

CI scientists

revised this concept with Myers in 1998to update and confirm his earlier findings.The results
were published in 1999 in a book sponsored by the Mexican company CEMEX and entitled"Hotspots, Earth's Biologically Richest and Most Endangered TerrestrialEcoregions."
In this analysis, we found 25 areas around the world of critical importance to biodiversity conservation, based on the number of species present, the number of those species foundexclusivelyin an ecosystem and the degree of threat they face. Their remaining natural habitats occupy only about 2% of the land surface of the planet, and yet have within them morethan 50% of all terrestrial biodiversity and more than three-quarters of biodiversity at greatest
risk. These hotpots, which include the Atlantic Forest region of Brazil, the Philippines,
Madagascar and the Indian Ocean islands, and the Polynesia/Micronesia archipelago, among
others, are the most endangered species-rich ecosystems with less than 25% of their original
vegetationremaining.
CI's hotspots analysis is a powerful tool to help chart the course for biodiversity conservation because it makes a sometimes overwhelming issue become much more manageable. If a major portion of the world's plant and animal species are found in only 2% of theplanet's land surface, then clearly a strong focus on targeted regions will maximize results. The
hotspot approach can help guide investments through this critical era for life on Earth. By
demonstratingthat something can actually be accomplished, further investment can be stimulated and greater involvement encouragedby the private sector, international aid agencies anddevelopmentbanks.
Indeed, a new $150-million fund designed to better safeguard the world's threatened
biological hotspots in developing countries was recently launched as a joint initiative ofConservationInternational (CI), the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility (GEF),
and has subsequently been joined by the MacArthur Foundation. The Critical Ecosystem
Partnership Fund (CEPF) focuses primarily on the biodiversity hotspots, where it will try toadvance the global conservation agenda on severalfronts, resulting in improved managementof protected areas and coordinationin biodiversitycorridors. Investmentswill support projects
such as training, trans-nationalplanning, local dialogue with extractive industries, conflict resolution, priority setting and consensus building, strengthening indigenous organizatidns andfacilitation of partnerships between the private sector and protected areas.
At the other end of the threat spectrum, we have the last remaining major tropicalwilderness areas. Like the hotspots, these are also rich in biodiversity, but they differ in thatthey still have more than 75% of their original natural vegetation and they have low humanpopulation densities of 5 people/km2or less. These areas are few and far between, but they areof great global importance for variety of reasons, among which is the fact that they are the lastplaces where indigenous tribal societiesare likely to be able to maintain any semblance of theirtraditional lifestyle. These include the upper Amazon region of South America; the southern
Guianas and southernVenezuela,also in SouthAmerica; the Congo Basin in Africa; and muchof the island of New Guinea. Unfortunately, even these largely intact regions are now underassault, and like Conservation International and the Government of Suriname did in the caseof the Central Suriname Wilderness Nature Reserve, it is important to set a precedent in protecting large blocks of undisturbed tropical wilderness.

41

To meet this challenge, Conservation Internationalhas created the Global Conservation
Fund (GCF) to help finance major conservation corridors in the Earth's few remaining major
tropical wilderness areas. Implementing the GCF will require further refinement of conservation priorities through assessment of the scope of threat to these areas, incorporation of economic assessments that will highlight areas where conservation can best compete with more
destructive land uses, estimates of carbon sequestration potential, appraisal of potential funding sources and current investment climates, further biological assessments of unknown areas,
and institutional assessmentsof the feasibilityof wildernessprotection in certain key countries.
We have also placed emphasis on what I have called the Megadiversity countries; 17
nations out of a global total of more than 230 that by themselves account for more than twothirds of all life on Earth—terrestrial, freshwater and marine. Countries like Brazil, Indonesia,
Colombia, Mexico, Australia, Madagascar,China and theThilippines top this list, which also
includes Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela, Papua New Guinea, Malaysia, India, the Democratic
Republic of the Congo, South Africa and the United States.
To provide a better idea of the importance of these Megadiversity countries, just threeof them, Brazil, Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, by themselves accountfor almost 50% of the world's tropical rainforest. Using the primate example, once again,
although populations of non-human primates occur in some 92 countries worldwide,just fourof the Megadiversity countries, Brazil, Indonesia, Madagascar and the Democratic Republicof the Congo, account for at least two-thirds of livingprimate species, including some that are
most endangered. The details of the biodiversity found within these 17 outstanding regions
have also been published by CI and CEMEX in a book entitled "Megadiversity: Earth's
Biologically Wealthiest Nations," which was coauthored by myself, my wife Cristina and thefamed Mexican photographer and conservationist, Patricio Robles Gil.

Eastern
Himalayannne,CentreChile.

CONSNAVAtIONINTERNATIONAL
Activo Arens

Global42

biodiversity

hotspots

To give you a few examples
file of the Atlantic
withinForestregionof these priorityof Brazil,

one of the tworichestwhich

is in its entirety

both a threatenedSouth

Americanbest examplesof Surinameof tropicalwilderness

I would

one of the world's

Megadiversity

country

areas,

countries

hotspot

like to provide

top-priority

on Earth;of New

hotspots

the island

and a Megadiversity

and the islandwhichoccurringof Madagascar,country;

Guinea,a brief pro-and the small
are perhaps

theareas.

Brazil's Atlantic Forest Region
Starting with the Atlantic Forest region of Brazil, this is a region that has been one of my two
principal research interests over the past 25 years. Although we usually hear much more about
the Amazon, the Atlantic Forest region is, without a doubt, the highest conservation priority inthe country. It is a unique series of ecosystems
sive Amazonian

forests to the northwest,that is quite distinct from the much more exten-

and once stretched almost continuously

from the stateof Rio Grande do Norte in northern Brazil, south as far as the Rio Grande do Sul, the southernmost Brazilian

state, an area of about 1.2 million km2, or about 3.2 times the size of Japan.

When naturalists

passed through this region in the beginningfound some of the richest, tallest and most impressive
orchid and bromeliad

flora and an abundantof the nineteenth

into the agri-

three decades of rapid economic

two of theand one of the two largest in the world, Sao Pauloand Rio de Janeiro. The results have been large-scale
way for plantations,and it developed

center of the country. And this now has within its borders

three largest cities in all of South Americarich

and diverse fauna.

However, this was the first part of Brazil to be colonized,
cultural and industrial

century, they

forests on Earth, with an especiallydevelopment,

forest destruction,

especiallyin the last

first for lumber and charcoal and then to makecattle, pasture and industry. These maps of the state of Sao Paulo show

very well what has happened.
onward, the real pressure

Althoughdevelopment

took place from the 16th century

began in the 20th century and especiallyafter 1950. Now, there is

only about 3% left of what once was an expanse of forest in this important state.
Things are much the same in the rest of the region, and we estimate that at most 8% of
the Atlantic Forest still stands. In some states, the remaining

primary forest cover is 1% or less.

Most of what has survived is in small, isolated, widely separate forest patches surrounded
developed and degraded land. Only in the mountains

in Serra do Mar, especiallybyalong the Sao

Paulo and Parana coast and also some extents in Rio de Janeiro and Espirito Santo, do reasonably continuous

stretches of forest remain, and even these are at risk.

As one might expect, the animals and plants native to the Atlantic Forest are not doing
very well under such circumstances,and it is important to point out that the Atlantic Forest has

one of the highest concentrationsof terrestrial

mated 20,000 higher

biodiversity

plants, of which 6,000 are endemic;

endemic; 620 birds, 160 endemic; and 260 amphibians,

on Earth. Indeed it has an estitogether

with 261 mammals,

73

128 endemic. These numbers make theAtlantic Forest one of the highest five hotspots on Earth, and if the region were a country, it
would by itself rank among the top ten countries
Unfortunately,much of this spectacularon Earth for biodiversity.

biodiversity is at great risk, and the primates are

the species example. There are six genera and 24 different species and subspecies

of monkeys

43found in the Atlantic Forests. Studies that we have been conducting since 1979 indicate thatfully 79% of these are endemic. Two groups of monkeys stand out among the rest, they are themuriquis, genus Brachyteles, which are the largest of the South American monkeys, and thelion tamarins, genus Leonthopithecus,which includes the famous golden lion tamarin and its
three spectacular relatives, the golden-headed lion tamarin, the black lion tamarin, and theblack-headed lion tamarin, the last of which was not discovered by science until 1990.These
animals are representatives of two of the most critically endangered primates genera in theworld, and they are now found only in forest remnants in the region. Their numbers are shockingly low, with only several hundred to a thousand golden lion tamarins, black lion tamarins
and black-headed lion tamarins, less than 300 of the northern species of muriqui and perhaps
a thousand of the southern species of muriqui remaining; only the golden-headed lion tamarin
is somewhat more abundant, with an estimated population of 6,000 to 15,000, but even it isconsideredendangered. These unique and attractiveanimals have been the flagship species forthis entire region. The golden lion tamarin has been the subject of a successful reintroduction
program and a major international research and education program. All of these species havebeen used in a variety of campaigns and study programs that have helped to conserve not only
themselves, but their remaining forest habitats as well. As a result, the muriquis and tamarins
which were virtually unknown to the Brazilian public at the beginning of the 1980s, are now
so popular that they appear on the cover of phone books, on postage stamps, as themes ofparades and in theater presentations, and they have even made it onto floats of Rio's famous
Carnivaleand into the local folklore.
Even more important, by using these species as symbols, we have managed to elevate
this previously unknown and overlooked region to national and international attention, to thepoint that there are now many different conservationprograms totaling tens of millions of dollars focusing on the work in the Atlantic Forest, the most recent of which is a 40-millionhectare corridorsproject that is being discussed by the.World Bank and the European Union.
As unbelievable as it may seem, much of this would not have happened had it not been for thegreat appeal and charisma of a handful of monkeys.
The Island of Madagascar
Switching continents now, let's take a trip to one of the world's most exotic locales, the islandof Madagascar. And in moving to Madagascar we are not just traveling to another part of theworld, we are really traveling back millions of years in evolutionary time. Madagascar is aunique evolutionaryexperiment, a living laboratory unlike anywhere else on Earth. Although
it is located only about 400 kilometers off the East coast of Africa, Madagascar has been separated from the African mainland for a very long time, perhaps as long as 160-million years,
and most of the plants and animal species occurring there have evolved in isolation and arefound nowhere else in the world. The very high levels of endemism that have resulted, notjust
at the species level, but at the generic and family levels as well, really set Madagascar apart,and have contributed to its being both on the top of the list of Earth's Megadiversity countries
and, like the Atlantic Forest of Brazil, one of the most threatened hotspots as well.
Since it is situated largely within the tropics, Madagascar also has very high species

44diversity in certain groups of organisms, especially given its relatively small size; about 1.5
times the size of Japan. For instance, although it occupies only about 1.9% of the total land areaof the African region, it has more orchid species than the whole of the African mainland, andindeed it is home to about 25% of all African plants. Its total vascular plant diversity is estimated at 11,000 to 12,000 species, of which an astounding 80% are endemic. Reptile andamphibian diversity is also quite high with some 300 species of reptiles, of which 274 areendemic; and 178 species of frogs, with 176 endemic and more species being discovered every
year.
However, the most conspicuous and attractive group of organisms in Madagascar, andthe one for which the country is best known, is the primates. But we are not talking about monkeys and apes, of which we usually think when we envision primates, but rather the lemurs.
The living lemurs are a fantastic radiation of five families, 14 genera and 64 different species
and subspecies, 100% of which are endemic to Madagascar, although two also occur on the
nearby Comores, where they were almost certainly introduced by man. They include such animals as Madame Berthe' s mouse lemur (Microcebus berthae), which, at 30 grams, is thesmallest living primate, up to ones as large as the Indri (Indri indri), which, is as big as a
medium-sized dog, looks like a cross between a teddy bear and a giant panda, and moves bybounding from tree to tree like an arboreal kangaroo. And the lemur radiation includes somevery strange species, most notably the mysterious Aye-aye (Daubentonia madagascariensis),which is surely one the strangest mammals on Earth and the only living representative of an
entire primate family, the Daubentonidae.
To give some indication of the great responsibilities that Madagascar has, it alone is
responsible for approximately 15% of all primate species, about 20% of all primate genera,and close to an incredible 30% of all primate families, making it the single highest priority area
on Earth for conservation of these, our closest living relatives.
I should point out that we still know very little about Madagascar's great diversity andthat a lot of basic biological inventories of the country's fauna and flora are still needed. Thisis especially true in the eastern rainforest region, which is the most diverse part of the country,
but also the least known. Prior to my first trip to Madagascar in 1994, I had always wondered
why little had been done there. It certainly couldn't be any more difficult to work there than,for instance, in remotes parts of the Amazon.
Now, a lot of people have a very romantic vision of what tropical forest research is likeand how wonderful it is to be in the forest primeval. Well, it is wonderful in many ways, but I
can assure you that it is not all coconut palms and white sand beaches. After a visit to the rainforest of eastern Madagascar, I discovered one of the reasons why so little had been done
there: leeches. In all my experience in the tropical rainforest, including a number of othercountries in Southeast Asia that have land leech populations, I had never before found them as
abundant and as persistent as they are in the rainforest of Madagascar. Fortunately, there is acure for them. A local plant called mangily is extremely effective in killing them and keeping
them off your body as long as it is applied. But if there is no mangily around, the leeches canbe a real problem.
Why are we so concerned about Madagascar? And why is it considered such as high pri-

45

ority? Well, although the human population is not that large, about 13-million people, or about
10% of the population of Japan in an area half as large again as Japan, there has been a long
history of environmental degradation on the island. Our own species arrived there only about
1,500 to 2,000 years ago, with land-use practices from Southeast Asia and from Africa thatwere entirely inappropriate to the fragile Malagasy environment, and has had a major impact
since that time. For example, a mosaic of forest and woodland savannah once covered the central plateau of Madagascar, but now there is little forest left. Erosion there is as serious as anywhere on the planet, and every year the rivers run red with eroded soil. A recent estimate by
the World Bank indicates that Madagascar was losing more than 300-million dollars per year
in future potential through erosion. Some 85% to 90% of Madagascar's natural habitats isalready gone and the remainder is being chipped away for firewood and charcoal and converted for slash-and-burn agriculture.
Hunting is a problem as well. Although certain species are taboo to certain tribes, likethe radiated tortoise among the Antandroy people of the far south and the Indri among theBetsimasaraka people of the eastern rainforest, others are subjected to serious hunting pressure. At risk are not only the lemurs, which are both trapped and hunted, but also other endemic
species such as the coua, one of Madagascar's endemic birds.
Lest anyone believe that extinction spasms that we so often talk about are a figment of
our imagination,he or she need only look at what has already been lost there over the past 2000
years in Madagascar.Among the species that disappeared are the elephant birds, which werethe largest birds that ever lived and whose eggs weighed almost 10 kilograms; and fully nine
genera and 16 species of giant lemurs, all of them the larger of the living species, representing
almost 40% of known lemur genera. These include some spectacular creatures like
Megaladapis, which resembled a large Australian Koala and grew to be the size of a calf, andArcheoindris, which was larger than an adult male gorilla and probably occupied a niche similar to that of the now-extinct North American ground sloth.
We have been very active in Madagascar, and have focused a lot of attention on key elements of the protected area network of the country, particularly on the Zahamena Reserve inthe eastern rainforest region of the country and the Ankafarantsika Reserve in the western, dry
deciduous forest. We have also been involved at a policy level. And our current program director, the honorable Leon Rajaobleina, was a former Ambassador to the United States and theformer Minister of Finance. We have produced a protected area focused action plan for lemur
conservation for Madagascar, a Field Guide to the Lemurs of Madagascar, to stimulate ecotourism, a much-needed source of foreign exchange and a great potential growth industry forthis country. And in 1995, we held the first-ever biodiversitypriority-setting workshop for thecountry, bringing together experts from Madagascar and all around the world.
Consequently,although we still have a very long way to go in Madagascar,and certainly
cannot afford to be complacent, the fact is that there is much reason to be optimistic. We are
now in an excellentposition to change the course of conservation history in a unique country.
Suriname
Finally,46

and Papua
in terms

New Guineaof specificareas,

I would

like to focus your attention

on two parts of the world,

Suriname and Papua New Guinea, that really represent the opposite end of the spectrum to thethreatened hotspots of the Brazilian Atlantic Forest and the Island of Madagascar.Unlike thehotspots, where so much has already been lost, these two countries fall within the category ofmajor tropical wilderness areas, meaning that, like the hotspots, they are high in biodiversity,
but unlike the hotspots, most of their natural vegetationis still intact. These are areas where we
still have some hope of achieving natural resource based sustainable development and where
there is also some chance that indigenous tribal people will be able to maintain some semblance of their traditional lifestyles.
The first of these, Suriname,is a former Dutch colony that was known as Dutch Guiana.
It achieved its independence from the Netherlands in 1975 and is the second of the three
Guianas in size and population. It had one of the lowest human population densities on Earth,with only 400,000 people in an area of about 166,000 km2 (44% the size of Japan). On top ofthis, most of the people live along the coast, and especially around the capital city of
Paramaribo,with only about 5% living in the vastinterior. Suriname also has the distinction of
having the highest remaining forest cover of any country, with some 90% of its forest still inprimary condition, making it one of the best countries for conservationof large intact tracts inthis globally important biome.
Suriname's culture is unique and very different from the rest of South America. The
coastal region is inhabited by Creoles of African origin: 31% Hindustanis of East Indian origin, 37% Javanese, 15% both of which came over as indentured servantsat the turn of the century; Chinese (less than 2%); and Dutch and a variety of other groups of European origin(2%), including one of the oldest Jewish communities in the New World. Several native
Amerindian tribes, among them the Trio, the Wayana, the Akurios, and the Bushnegroes orMaroons, inhabit the interior. The Bushnegroes are especially interesting. Numbering some
50,000 and divided into six tribes, they are the last runaway slave cultures in the Americas still
living what is in effect a West African lifestyle. They are a fiercely independent group that has
lived for centuries with little contact and little interference from the outside world.
On the other side of the planet is Papua New Guinea, one of the biologically and culturally most interesting nations on Earth. Another of the Megadiversity countries, it is also
megadiverse in human groups; indeed, in spite of its relatively small size (only a little larger
than Japan), it has the highest human cultural diversity of any country, with some 875 different languages spoken over its land area of some 475,369 km2.What is more, most of these cultures are still intact. Like Suriname, Papua New Guinea has most of its forest intact, and some
97% of it is in the hands of traditional owners. This is rather like the United States or Brazil
still being in the hands of the Native American Indians, and is very unusual for a nation thatwas colonized by European powers.
Back in 1997, when I wrote the first version of this essay, both the integrity of humanculture and the natural environment in both Suriname and Papua New Guinea were under
severe pressure, to the point that they too were at risk of being propelled into the hotspots category over the next decade. Largely overlooked for centuries, both of these countries were targeted by international timber conglomerates and international mining companies. The threatof timber companies was being driven largely by Malaysia and to a lesser extent Indonesia,

47

Taiwan and Korea, whereas mining interests were coming from a variety of different countries,
especially Canada. These activities, which I have referred to as "the last great natural resource
grab," have a strong neo-colonial flavor,and, like the European colonialism of past centuries,
leave little or nothing for the countries in question.
The attack by timber companies is particularlydisconcerting since there is little respect
for local forestry legislation. Widespread bribery and corruption, and much under-reportingand cheating on actual revenues, on top of the fact that concessions have five- to 10-year tax
holidays, mean that the country receives very little in up-front benefits other than employment
for the low income manual labors.
Indeed, analyses of the economics of these operations, including one done for Surinameby the World Resource Institution and Conservation International, indicated that cash profits
to the countries in question were very small and bordered on the insignificant. Furthermore, if
real social and environmental costs were taken into the equation, these poor countries would
have wound up in effect subsidizing the wealthy timber conglomerates by liquidating their
only significant long-term assets, their natural resources. Needless to say, this form of predatory exploitation has no place at the beginning of the new millennium and should be resistedby the leadership of countries like the United States and Japan.
I am happy to report that, a year after I originallywrote this piece, the ecological tragedy
that Suriname was about to agree to, turned into a conservation reality. Through a variety ofefforts involving both high level contacts within the Suriname government and international
media attention, we succeeded in convincing the Surinamers that there are better long-term
alternatives for them, including ecotourism, bioprospecting, non-timber forest products andperhaps joint implementation of carbon-offset and low-impact timber harvesting. With this
input, the Surinamersrejected requests from one Malaysianand two Indonesian companies forsome 3-million hectares of timber concessions, representing more than 20% of their forest
estate.
Indeed,in recognizingthat Suriname's future economic well-being will in part be basedon the appropriate use and conservation of its natural resources, together with CI, the country
created the Central Suriname Nature Reserve. This conservation corridor links three existing
protected areas, making it one of the largest nature reserves in South America, and quite possibly the single-mostpristine, tropical forested protected area on Earth. The Central Suriname
Nature Reserve forms a corridor linking the three most important protected areas in central
Suriname—theRaleighvallen,Tafelbergand Eilerts de Haan Gebergte Nature Reserves—andprotects the entire upper Coppename River watershed, one of Suriname's most important river
systems.
The new reserve covers a diversity of rainforest ecosystems, and is home to all eightspecies of Suriname's primates, more than 400 bird species, and other impressive wildlife,
such as the jaguar, giant armadillo and giant river otter.
The Central Suriname Nature Reserve is the critically important centerpiece of a longterm conservation and development strategy for Suriname. It is our belief that the creation ofthis Nature Reserve will generate significant economic benefits for the country and international recognition of Suriname as a global environmentalleader. We hope that this major step48

by one visionary country will inspire other nations to make similar commitments to the protection of critical tropical wilderness areas around the world.
In Papua New Guinea, unfortunately,the situation is much more complex and the international companies much more deeply entrenched, sometimesresulting in political upheavals.
The crisis in Bouganville, focusing on its copper mine, has been a major issue for the last
decade, and the recent government of Sir Julius Chan was toppled earlier this year because ofcontroversyover logging and mining concessions. At the same time, however, Malaysian companies are well established in many parts of Papua New Guinea and have converted large areasof forest.
Local landowners, many of whom were duped into signing over their land, are showing
signs of resistance throughout the country and in other parts of Melanesia as well. In someinstances, especially in the neighboring Solomon Islands, contracts were signedwith illiteratelandownersunable to read the documents they were signing, and logging activities are sometimes carried out 24 hours a day, using floodlightsat night, to ensure that the maximum amountof timber can be extracted before the landowners realize what is being done to them and begin
to resist.
The role of conservation international in these wilderness area countries is to informthem of the alternativesthat exist to such predatory forms of exploitation, and to demonstrate
to them successes based on rational biodiversity use in other tropical countries. One particularly successfuleffort was to take two delegations of Suriname parliamentariansto Costa Rica
to meet with then Costa Rican President Jose Maria Figueres, one of the leading proponentsof biodiversity conservation, and to see firsthand what was being done in terms of ecotourism
and bioprospecting in this enlightened country.
Ecosystem

Conservation:

CI's Comprehensive

Approach

These are some of the problems

we face in biodiversity

conservationand some of the priority

areas in which our organization

works. What I would like to do in the remainderof this pre-sentation is to tell you a bit more about the tools that we employ in our conservationand the specific kinds of activities
Internationalmoniously

is "to conservewith Nature."

conservation"in which we are engaged.

global biodiversity,

Our comprehensive

involve local people in all conservation
We are particularly

The mission of Conservationand to demonstrate
approachand includes a heavy emphasisthat people can live har-is simply referred

endeavors.

stones, especiallyhave a protectedfrom more than 25 countries,

programsof the organization

science, economics,

organization.

D.C., we have 24 offices in the countries in which

we work, and most of these are staffed entirely by nationals of the countries
The field-based

to as "ecosystem

on local capacity building and the need to fully

proud of the fact that we have a truly international

Although our main office is in Washington,
have staff members

programs

speaking

in question. We

more than 30 different languages.

rest heavily on what we refer to as our corner-

policy and communications,and all of our programs

area of some kind as their focal point.

49

A Sound ScientificBasis
Perhaps the most fundamental of all.CI cornerstones is science, since we firmly believe thatneither conservation nor sustainable development can be achieved without the soundest scientific underpinnings. To address this goal, CI, with a generous donation from CI's Board
Members and founders of the Moore Foundation, Gordon and Betty Moore, has created theCenter for Applied Biodiversity Science (CABS), a knowledge-based early warning systemdesigned to identify critical issues confronting the conservation of biological diversity.It both
anticipates destructive situations and is a preemptive force. The Center's mission is tostrengthen our ability to respond rapidly, wisely and effectively to emerging threats to the
Earth's biological diversity. To accomplish this, the Center mobilizes science, acts strategically, leveragespartnershipsand broadens public outreach. The Center identifies the most serious threats through a managed network of experts in related fields, such as natural resource
economics, conservation biology, biogeography, forestry,marine biology and others. Experts
are drawn from governmental agencies, international organizations, development agencies,
private corporations,universities, research centers, nongovernmentalorganizations and museums.
Each year, the Center funds 10 to 15 outstanding, senior-level scientists from a range ofbackgrounds as Biodiversity Research Fellows, enabling them to focus on developing fieldbased solutions. If appropriate,the fellows field-testnew theories, building upon Conservation
International's presence in the hotspot regions.
Our other signature science program, the Rapid Assessment program (RAP), whichuses the talents of some of the world's best field biologists to provide quick assessments ofpoorly known tropical ecosystems is overseen by CABS. RAP methodologies have been perfected by a team of superstarscientists working mainly in the Tropical Andean region of SouthAmerica, the Melanesia region, Madagascar and, more recently, in the Caura River basin of
Venezuela, the Okavango Delta of Botswana and Irian Jaya in Indonesia. Upcoming RAP
expeditions include the Cutucu Mountains of Ecuador and the Kanuku Mountains of Guyana.
CI also works closely with the World Conservation Union, especially through its
Species Survival Commission. This commission is the world's largest volunteer network of
biodiversityexperts, and currentlyis composed of some 8,000members dividedinto more than
100 specialistgroups. I have chaired the Primate Specialist Group since 1977, and we produce
a wide variety of newsletters and journals through the SSC. These include a primate conservation journal, four different primate newsletters (for Asia, Africa, Madagascar and the
Neotropical region), a Neotropical bat newsletter,an edentate newsletter, and ajournal of chelonian conservationand biology.
We have also just produced the latest version of the IUCN Red Data Books and Red
Lists, the principal reference works on threatened species and a mainstay of the conservation
community for some three decades. Finally, we are producing a Tropical Field Guide series
aimed at providing ready-to-use information on a wide variety of tropical organisms, with a
special goal of increasing interest in specialized ecotourism and "life-listing" and "watching"for everything from frogs and butterflies to turtles and monkeys.

50

Economics: Conservation through Enterprise Development
Also of great importance for Conservation International is economics. We recognize that it isessential to demonstrate that good biodiversity can also be good business, and that we can infact come up with "win-win" solutions that conserve natural ecosystems and contribute to thenational and local "bottom line" as well. To address these issues CI, with a generous donationfrom Ford Motor Company, has recently created the Center for Environmental Leadershipand Business (CELB). Like CABS, CELB operates as a division of Conservation International
and is headquartered in Washington, D.C. But it is governed by its own executive board ofprestigious business and environment leaders.
The Center works in partnership with a wide range of companies and environmentalorganizations to promote business practices that reduce industry's environmental effects andcontribute to conservation. These practices also benefit business by cutting the costs associatedwith environmental impact and by enhancing a company's reputation with communities, customers, employees, and shareholders. The result is what the Center calls a "net benefit" forboth the global environment and for business. The Center concentrates on those industries withthe greatest environmental effect on critical ecosystems and those with the potential to bringabout positive environmental change, including agriculture and fisheries, forestry, energy andmining, travel and leisure, transportation, manufacturing and financial services. The Center
provides an open forum where business leaders, environmentalists and academics can work
together to create innovative solutions.
Another of Conservation International's tools is the Conservation Enterprise Fund
(CEF). This was created in 1999.
with a $1 million loan from the Small and Medium Enterprise(SME)—Global Environmental Facility program of the International Finance Corporation. CI
acts as the financial intermediary to provide debt and equity financing of $25,000–$250,000
to small and medium-sized enterprises ($5 million or less in assets) that are strategically important to conservation. The CEF is an enterprise development tool that enables conservationenterprises to expand their operations through financial leverage. CEF funds are directed tobusinesses engaged in activities such as agroforestry, ecotourism and wild harvest products.
Multifaceted Policy Program
The third of our cornerstones is policy, and it recognizes that you can have the best possible science and the strongest economic incentives and still fail in your conservation efforts if perverse
national and international policies militate against what you are trying to accomplish. Our policy program is multifaceted, and deals with a wide range of issues. Beginning with the first everdebt-for-nature swap carried out by Bolivia in 1987, we have always paid attention to creative
financing mechanisms and have attempted to stretch each conservation dollar as far as possible. Subsequent to that first debt swap, we have also carried out swaps in Mexico, Costa Rica
and Madagascar, and several of these are producing returns.
More recently, we have pushed the concept of trust funds designed to meet the recurrent
costs of managing protected areas. CI has structured national and regional conservation funds
to provide long-term, steady disbursements consistent with the needs of field programs.
Conservation funds have contributed significantly to conservation for specific regions, and also

51

to the building of leadership and institutions within communities.
The creation of a fund usually requires the creation of a board of directors drawn fromlocal communities, from government agencies and from business groups. The process ofadministering the funds, making grants and dealing with regional and national institutions
builds individual leadership and strengthens community interests. In essence, these funds act
as catalysts in developing consensus between different interest groups such as local communities and donor agencies. Consequently, national and regional conservation funds have now
become important actors in delivering resources to conservation projects.
CI's policy department is also building on our combined experiences in conservation
biology, economics and policy to promote "best practices" in natural resource extraction withthe goal of influencing the resource-extraction industries to become forces for biodiversity
conservation,rather than threats to it.
Finally, we have worked on influencing a variety of legislative processes relating tobiodiversity, from the United States to Brazil, to Madagascar, the International FinanceCorporation (IFC), and the Global Environment Facility (GEF), among others.
International
Finally,

Communications

the communications

tion must

ultimately

cornerstone,

come

from

to the poor

villagerInternational

Communications

for getting

the word

Washington,

D.C.,

coveragetionalProgramlivingfor biodiversity,

media

at all times.

These

different

in whichwhere.

Indeed,we work,

video

department"tools"and culturally
andthe highest-level

to develop

the issue

protected

area.

appropriate

strategies

togetherthat our programsis that we should

readyfor use in-country.
television

and Internetof the national

and interna-

in a variety
programs

haveof wayswork

Our

to come up

in each of the 23 coun-

had significant

not be involved

presence
is not going to make a difference,and that we should
chance of "changing
the course of conservation
history."

Our

press,

on the agenda

conservation

makersregionallyon getting

are mixed

for conserva-

decision

importantand other materials

sensitive

we feelthe fact that support

fromof a globally
helps

concentrates

and on keeping

our basic philosophy

recognizesof society,vicinity

department

conservation

with the most effectivetries

in theout and provides
Media

which

all sectors

impactin a particular
only where

every-

area if ourwe have a real

Realizing the Dream of Biodiversity Conservation
After all is said and done, where do we really stand at this critical juncture in human history,
as we take our first steps into this new millennium. Will the whole world wind up looking likea devastated central plateau region of Madagascar or is there a chance of developing solutions
and achievingsome level of harmony between Nature and the needs and aspirations of our own
species?
Well, I am an optimist by nature, and I believe that we have made very significant
progress, especially in the last 10 years. Ever since the Earth summit in Rio de Janeiro in June
1992, a much criticized and underrated event that I believe was the turning point in biodiversity conservation, we have seen some very important seed changes in attitude on the part of52

governments, multilateral banks, bilateral aid agencies, the different branches of the United
Nations and other major players.
The World Bank and other major international lending agencies, which were considered
to be the enemy by the environmental community as recently as the mid 1980s, have done amajor turn around and they are slowly becoming a positive force for conservation (although tobe sure much needs to be done and some components of the World Bank family, especially theInternational Finance Corporation (IFC) lag far behind).
I had the privilege of chairing the first ever World Bank task force on biodiversity in
1998, which was actually responsible for first introducing the term "biodiversity" into the
Bank lexicon. Virtually nothing was being done on the issue at that time. Now, just 13 years
later, the World Bank has become a major player in biodiversity conservation, and we expect
it to advance even further under the able leadership of Bank President Jim Wolfensohn.
The Global Environment Facility, a joint program of the World Bank and the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Environment Program(UNEP),and housed at the Bank, has put several hundred million dollars into biodiversity conservation since 1993. Another product of the Earth Summit, the Biodiversity Convention,provides the international legal framework and a forum for discussing biodiversity issues on alegal basis.
However, the most encouraging new development is, without a doubt, the increasing
interest demonstrated by the private sector.Over the past few years, and again especially since
the Earth Summit in Rio, we have seen the emergence of a new generation of corporate executives who are truly interested in doing somethingpositive for the global environment and also
understand that being "green" is good for the "bottom-line."
Here in Japan, we at CI have had an excellent relationship with the Keidanren for justthe past ten years, and they have established an important nature conservation fund to support
worthy projects in tropical countries. In the United States, real leadership on biodiversity conservation is coming from corporations like INTEL, United Airlines, Mobil, McDonalds, Ford
Motor Company, Disney, Starbucks and a number of others, and in the tropical countries weare seeing the same trend with major participation from companies like Pulsar and CEMEXin Mexico and the Unibanco and Banco Real in Brazil. Since so much of what happens in theworld is driven by or at least heavily influenced by the corporate sector, we are particularly
pleased by this encouraging new trend.
The role of Japan is especially critical. As one of the world's economic powers and amajor trendsetter in the Asia-Pacific region, and indeed the entire world, Japan's example isfollowed very closely.Japan needs to take a leadership role in environmental issues in generaland in biodiversity conservation in particular,and there are very encouraging signs that this istaking place. The creation ten years ago of the very important Blue Planet Prize, which I truly
believe to be the environmental equivalent to the Nobel Prize, is one such sign, and we at CI
feel honored and privileged to have received this prestigious award this year.
The final message I would like to leave you with is that we all have to be upbeat andoptimistic about biodiversity conservation. In spite of all the gloom and doom and endless
reports of destruction, species loss, and environmental disasters, there are real success stories

53

out there.

We have to learn

is going

to take ever increasing

oped countries

like Japan

from them,interest,

and the Unitedcolleagues

from biodiversity-rich

to maintainlife on Earthtropicalfor future

time. We simply

have to approach

I see no reason

why we can't

realities.

54

build on themfinancial
States,and replicate

supportthem

whereverpossible.

and technicalsupportfrombut I think that by working

countries,

we can achieve

solutionsgenerations

and attend

conservation

as the art of the possible,

turn today'sconservation

to real needs

dreamstogetherItdevel-

with ourthat will help usof people

at the sameand if we can do that,

into tomorrow's

conservation

Major Publications
Conservation International
President's Office
Kormos, Cyril F., B. A. Grosko, and R. A. Mittermeier. "United States Participation in International
Environmental Law and Policy." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 13 (2001).

Center For Applied Biodiversity Scienceda Fonseca, G.A.B., A. Balmford, C. Bibby, R.A. Mittermeier, et al. "Following Africa's Lead in
Setting Priorities." Nature, 405 (2000), 393-394.
Brooks, T., M. Bakarr, G. Fonseca & A. Rylands. "Pessimism from Manu." Conservation Biology. In
press.
Brooks, T. "Living on the Edge." Nature, 403 (2000), 26-29.
— . Ed. "Extinct Species in BirdLife." Threatened Birds of the World. Cambridge, U.K.: BirdLife
International, 2000,695-703.
Rice, Richard, Cheri Sugal and Gustavo Fonseca. "Sustainable Forest Management: A Review ofCurrent Conventional Wisdom." Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation
International. 2001.
Gullison, R.E., R.E. Rice, and A.G. Blundell. "Marketing Species Conservation." Nature, April 2000.
Brunner, A.G., R.E. Gullison, R.E. Rice and G.A.B. Fonseca. "Effectiveness of Parks in Protecting
Tropical Biodiversity." 01 Science.
Bakarr, M.I., G. Fonseca, R.A. Mittermeier, A. Rylands, and K.W. Painemilla, ed. "Hunting andBushmeat Utilizationin the African Rain Forest; Perspectives toward a Blueprint for Conservation
Action."Advances inApplied BiodiversityScience, 2 (2001). Washington,D.C.: Center for Applied
Biodiversity Science, Conservation International.
Cyril, Kormos and Layla Hughes. "Regulating Genetically Modified Organisms, Striking a Balance
between Progress and Safety." In Advances in Biodiversity Science, 1 (2000). Washington, D.C.:
Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International.
van Roosmalen, Marc G. M., Tomas van Roosmalen, R. A. Mittermeier, and Anthony B. Rylands.
"Two New Species of Marmoset, Genus Callithrix Erxleben, 1777 (Callitrichidae, Primates) fromthe Tapajos/Madeiras Interfluvium, South Central Amazon, Brazil." Neotropical Primates, 8 (1),March (2000).
Rylands, Anthony B., Horacio Schneider, Alfredo Langguth, R. A. Mittermeier, Cohn P. Groves,Ernesto Rodriguez-LunaAn. "Assessment of the Diversity of New World Primates." NeotropicalPrimates, 8 (2), June (2000).
Maps
Hotspots: Earth's Biologically Richest and Most Endangered Terrestrial Ecoregions
BiodiversityHotspots: State of the Hotspots, 2000.
Sistema De Areas Protegidas De La Amazonia; Red Latinoamericana de Cooperacion Tecnica en
Parques Nacionales,otras Areas Protegidas,Flora y Fauna Silvstres-Subred de Areas Protegidas delAmazonas (SURAPA).
Vegetation de la Selva Maya (Spanish and English), Regional Analysis Program. May 2000.
Field Support Division
Ecotourism
Ecotourism Publications
Role Modelsfor Sustainable Tourism. Ecotourism Department. September 2000.

55

Hillel, Oliver, Heloisa de Oliveira, Maria Emilia Assy and Jamie Sweeting. Ecotourism Capacity
Building Workshops – Investing in People to Preserve the Environment. (Original title in
Portuguese: Oficinas de Capacitaceio em Ecoturismo – Investindo em Pessoas para Conservar o
Meio Ambiente).ConservationInternational,Secretaria de Coordenacaoda Amazonia/Ministerio do
Meio Ambiente, 2000.
Edwards S., C. Holtz and 0. Hillel. Integrating Biodiversity Considerations into the Tourism Sector.
May 2000.
Sabrina Bini S., E. Assy, G. Ryan, S. Frazee, S. Edwards, 0. Hillel. Ecotourism Education andAwareness: A Manual for CI CommunityExtensionists.January 2000.
Ecotourism Fact Sheets
2000. (Updated every 4-6 months).
Ecotourism Department Initiatives Paper.
Ecotourism.
Ecotourism Development Program.
Ecotourism Enterprise Development & Marketing.
Ixcan Biological Station.
Mayan Trails.
Chalalan Ecolodge.
Ghana's Central Region.
Togean Ecotourism Network Una Ecopark.
Ecotourism Brochures
2000. (Updated periodically).
Pantanal – Fazenda Rio Negro.
Scarlet Macaw Trail.
Estaci6n Ixcan.
Eco-Escuela de Espanol.
Escuela Ecologico-Cultural de Idioma Espanol (Bio-Itza).
Togean Ecotourism Network.
Una Ecopark.

Ecotourism
Manuals
FY2001.
Feasibility Studies for Ecotourism Businesses.
Business Planning for Ecotourism Businesses.
Marketing Planning for Ecotourism Businesses.
Financial Planning for Ecotourism Businesses.
Using Marketing and Promotional Tools for Ecotourism Businesses.
Integrating Market Preferences into the Ecotourism Product Workshop.
Environmental
and Cultural Interpretation
Workshops for Ecotourism Enterprises.

Conservation Enterprise
Conservation Enterprise Fund Fact Sheets
Conservation Coffee. (Updated 9/2000).
Conservation Enterprise Fund. (01/2001).
Conservation Cocoa. (09/2000).

56

CEP Publications
Millard, E. Enterprise as a Conservation
Strategy. Conservation Enterprise,
Morris, J. Fostering
Strategic Relationships
between Community-Based
Markets. Conservation Enterprise, 2001.

2000.
Enterprises

and Niche

57