On October 23, the China Biodiversity Conservation and Green Development Foundation (CBCGDF) Standards Center convened an expert seminar on seven national environmental protection standards including the "Technical Guidelines for Ecological Environmental Damage Assessment". To encourage all participating experts to speak freely, Dr. Zhou Jinfeng, Secretary-General of CBCGDF said in his speech at the meeting: Different suggestions or opinions are actually more valuable to the makers of standards or policies and can provide a broader perspective. Does genetic damage on a large-scale count as environmental damage? Can the series of standards of technical guidelines for identification and assessment of ecological and environmental damage be revised into a broader concept of technical guidelines for identification and assessment of biological diversity?

Here are the views of Dr. Zhou Jinfeng.

Soliciting opinions before the introduction of various standards, laws, regulations, policies, etc., is a very valuable opportunity. For standard setters, the most important, or the most valuable thing is to receive different opinions or suggestions.

I hope that when we organize such a meeting, everyone will pay special attention to putting forward different opinions. This is our focus. I used to be a member of the Proposal Committee of the CPPCC National Committee for 15 years. In the past, when we collected CPPCC proposals, we emphasized operability. If we felt that we could not change them, we would not raise opinions. In today's work, we should realize that this should not be done. Regardless of whether it can be changed or not, if we think it is correct, we shall put it forward for the reference of decision-makers.

When the 2016 Wildlife Protection Law was revised, we raised a lot of opinions, some of which have not been revised. But this time, some opinions have been absorbed in the NPC’s “Decision on the Comprehensive Ban on Illegal Wildlife Trade, Elimination of the Bad Habits of Overeating Wild Animals, and Effective Protection of People’s Life, Health and Safety”. This shows that the relevant standards or policies may not be changed at that time, but they can be changed in the future. Everyone’s focus should be on providing valuable suggestions for relevant departments to amend laws and formulate regulations. Different opinions are actually more valuable opinions. I hope everyone can know everything and speak freely. There may be people who feel that they are not thorough in their research or feel that they are a bit extreme. These are not important. The important thing is to put forward all kinds of opinions and let the relevant departments see them for their reference.

First of all, let me put forward my opinions on the first page of the series of standards, and offer some suggestions. Anything like this "superficial" can be raised, and everyone can let go of their opinions. Let me give a comment on the title, which is called “Technical Guidelines for Ecological and Environmental Damage Identification and Assessment”. It specifically explains what the ecological environment is, and ecological environmental damage refers to the unfavorable transformation of water, atmosphere, soil, animals, plants, microorganisms, etc. or the degradation of ecosystem functions due to pollution or ecological damage. But we know that the concept of biodiversity defined in the United Nations actually includes three levels, namely genetic diversity, species diversity, and ecosystem diversity. Genetic diversity is a very important content of biological diversity, but here, genes are not included in the definition of environmental damage. Then, if the genetic diversity is fundamentally damaged, whether it is considered as ecological and environmental damage, there is a big question here.

Second, for example, the two terms ecological and environmental overlap in their connotations and extensions. For example, the definition of the new "Environmental Law" includes ecological. These two mutually inclusive definitions are juxtaposed. Used in combination, it is language ill. In view of this, how about changing it to technical guidelines for identification and assessment of biodiversity damage? The concept of biodiversity damage is larger, and it includes three levels of genetic diversity, species diversity, and ecosystem diversity.

In the current draft of the seven national standards for comments, the human-centered definition of "environment" focuses on water, soil, and air. In fact, they are all part of the ecosystem. The concept of biodiversity is defined internationally and scientifically, and it is now receiving more and more attention from society.

When we interpret biodiversity, some people think that biodiversity is to help endangered species. This is prejudice. Biodiversity and endangered species cannot be equated. The United Nations has a definition, the PNC has a definition, and there are official documents. Biodiversity includes genetic diversity, species diversity, and ecosystem diversity. The identification and assessment of damage to biodiversity includes the assessment of genes, species, etc., as well as the assessment of the environmental elements on which the ecosystem depends. "Environment" mainly refers to the habitat, ecosystem, water, climate and other elements with human beings at the core.

My suggestion is a bit "tricky". I will make a small speech first. I hope everyone will emancipate their minds, speak freely, and say more about different suggestions or opinions. This can effectively push us to further do our work well and provide a more comprehensive vision for standard setters. Thank you.

(Photo credit: CBCGDF)

Original Chinese article:

http://www.cbcgdf.org/NewsShow/4854/14324.html

By / Yao Jiahui (Intern) Modified / Maggie

https://www.paypal.me/CBCGDFChina

http://www.cbcgdf.org/English/ConfirmDonaTion/0.html

(Please indicate "I read CBCGDF" in the payment notes, thank you!)