MEET TODAY’S GUEST: THE CHIMERA
Biodiversity as a Chimera
The predominant view of biodiversity as multifaceted has led to multiple definitions and interpretations, creating a “lexicon zoo” 1 that transforms biodiversity into a “chimera” 2 and a “complex beast to measure” 3
Chimera or Chimaera, is a mythological creature composed of multiple animal parts.
The Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) has inherited the Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) “enigmatic” 4, a notoriously expansive definition of biodiversity— so broad, multifunctional, and conceptually overloaded that it becomes operationally unworkable.
The multifaceted definition of biodiversity from the CBD:
"Biological diversity" means the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems.
When the definition of biodiversity relies on a Latin phrase like "inter alia", precision has already been lost.
I think that continuing with the CBD definition means perpetuating a conceptual chimera—one that is impossible to monitor, compare, or manage.
Yet we persist. Not because it works, but because we believe it is the only way to preserve everything that matters.
Consider what Mace and colleagues (2012) wrote:
"We recommend accepting and using the broad inclusive definition from the CBD, which makes it straightforward to recognise the complexity of biodiversity and then to consider the ways that it is involved in ecosystem services."
And so it is clear how the academic community just loves adding more layers, like the utilitarian turn that has been prominent since the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005.
But when biodiversity is expected to represent all that we value in the natural world, the result is conceptual overload and policy paralysis.
B. G. Marcot, Biodiversity and the lexicon zoo. Forest Ecology and Management 246, 4–13 (2007).
C. Santana, Biodiversity is a chimera, and chimeras aren’t real. Biol Philos 33, 15 (2018).
C. Duncan, J. R. Thompson, N. Pettorelli, The quest for a mechanistic understanding of biodiversity–ecosystem services relationships. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 282, 20151348 (2015).
S. Naeem, J. E. Duffy, E. Zavaleta, The Functions of Biological Diversity in an Age of Extinction. Science 336, 1401–1406 (2012).
Biodiversity, reconsidered.
The time has come to decisively reconsider biodiversity’s meaning for global policy and monitoring, paradoxically by narrowing it rather than expanding it.
At present, we have stretched the definition of Biodiversity to the point that it has become a synonym for Nature.
What we need is a return to the classical ecological definition: biodiversity as species richness and abundance. This is the most fundamental and direct indicator of the variety of life in a place, region, country, etc.
This doesn’t mean we are ignoring other dimensions of nature. It means recognizing that they can (and should) be measured independently.
Ecosystem services can be quantified. Functional diversity can be assessed. Genetic variation can be analyzed. Ecological interactions can be studied. None of these requires redefining biodiversity to include them.
This separation is not a loss. It is a gain in clarity.
For global policy, biodiversity, defined as richness and abundance, has clear advantages for monitoring and accountability: It’s measurable at scale. Richness and abundance can be sampled repeatedly, compared across time, and modeled with uncertainty.
Overall, the greatest threat to biodiversity policy is probably not disagreement over metrics.
It is the insistence that biodiversity must represent everything we value in the natural world, rather than something we can clearly define, measure, and act upon.
If we keep defining biodiversity as “the sum of all biotic variation from genes to ecosystems”, we’ll keep getting endless frameworks, endless metrics, and endless excuses for why nothing is comparable.
Let’s keep the discussion. Please share accordingly.
▶ Know someone who’d love this? Forward it their way.
If this resonated, feel free to share it with colleagues or collaborators. Circulate this issue within your team or network.
▶ Was this email forwarded to you?
Biodiversity Affairs is a platform for independent and expert-led thinking on biodiversity. Join at https://biodiversityaffairs.beehiiv.com/