Today is International Day of Biodiversity – a good reason to celebrate nature, but also a reminder that we are not the only form of life on this planet. We might think of ourselves as an ‘intelligent’ species but our collective behaviour, at least as far as nature is concerned, shows few signs that that might be true. The simple fact is that we risk destroying this precious planet for future generations, or at least saddling them with an enormous financial and environmental legacy of having to fix the problems we couldn’t.

Biodiversity is the flip side of the climate change coin. Yet, while it seems that the world has finally woke up to the threats posed by climate change, it still hasn’t yet fully registered the threat posed by the loss of biodiversity.

One of the reasons is that the economic arguments for protecting biodiversity have not yet fully filtered through to policymakers and businesses.

Another reason is that most of us think that biodiversity loss is about the threat of extinction of a few well known threatened species like tigers and gorillas. And while that is certainly part of the problem, biodiversity loss is about much more than that. It is about losing the incredible variety of life forms we share our planet with, and the implications of this for our own species. Because biodiversity is made up not only of animals and plants, but also the ecosystems that supply many of our most basic needs, like food, fresh water, raw materials, fertile soil, medicines, protection from extreme weather and so much more. It underpins our well being and is essential to economic prosperity. And in recent decades it seems we − the intelligent species − have been doing our best to use it, waste it, interfere with it and generally destroy this precious resource. To say we have taken it for granted would be a huge understatement.

This callous disregard is directly linked to growth. During the 20th century the human population grew by four times and economic output by 40 times. We increased our fossil fuel use by 16 times, our fishing catches by 35 and our water use by nine. At the same time – and it is no coincidence – we have been living through an alarming global decline in species and natural habitats at up to 1000 times the natural rate. In the EU alone, up to one quarter of animal species is threatened with extinction and 88 per cent of our fish stocks are over-exploited. Most of our ecosystem services are ‘degraded’ – no longer able to deliver those basic and largely unknown, yet vital services such as crop pollination, clean air and water, and control of floods or erosion.

By 2050, the global population will have risen to nine billion people. It wouldn’t take a genius to work out that we are on the very slippery slope towards ecological disaster.

Protecting nature is both a moral and ethical issue. It goes without saying that we must preserve the planet’s natural wonders for its own sake and for future generations, but if that is not a convincing enough argument for some people then the economic argument should be. It is in our own interest to conserve and restore them – otherwise we are just ‘biting the hand that feeds us’. And if we don’t make those smart investments now to protect the diversity of life and healthy ecosystems around us then we face even heavier bills later to try and restore what has been lost.

This is not blind faith in nature. There is documented, solid economic thinking behind it. The study on ‘The Economy of Ecosystems and Biodiversity’ (TEEB) estimates that business opportunities from investments in nature could be worth US$2-6 trillion by 2050, and recommends factoring the true economic value of biodiversity into decision-making and reflecting it in systems of national accounts. The study contains some startling figures. The following are a few examples: The total economic value of insect pollination is estimated at US$153 billion per year, representing nearly 10 per cent of world agricultural output for human food. The annual loss of opportunity due to over-exploitation of global fisheries is estimated at US$50 billion. The city of New York saved US$6.5 billion by investing in maintaining natural water purification services in the Catskills watershed rather than opting for a filtration plant.

So what can we do about it? World environment ministers agreed last year in Nagoya on a global strategy to combat biodiversity loss. This was a success in itself, but the challenge now is to follow through and implement those targets. It is a challenge that needs to be taken up in the widest possible way. It has to be on the agenda of not just environment ministers but also of the ministers dealing with agriculture, fisheries, industry, transport, research, trade... Halting biodiversity loss needs to be discussed in Parliaments, boardrooms and in living rooms. I will be doing my bit within the EU to try to make sure this happens at the political level. I hope many others will join me.

There is a well-known Cree Indian Prophecy, which says, “Only after the last tree has been cut down, only after the last river has been poisoned, only after the last fish has been caught, only then will you find that money cannot be eaten.”

I would not like to belong to the generation which proves the wisdom of the Cree Indians.

Janez Potočnik is the European

Commissioner for the Environment