The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has been a spur for this: in 2002, it adopted a target “to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth”.

This wording assumes a positive link between biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation – but is this justified? It is clear that biodiversity loss will continue beyond 2010—but what will this mean for poverty reduction? Even if conservation efforts were successful, would they really contribute to poverty reduction? There is a diversity of opinion as to the nature and scale of biodiversity conservation–poverty reduction links and the most appropriate mechanisms that can help to maximise them. Claims are often made on the basis of a limited number of case studies, limited number of contexts, or localised definitions of success or failure in conservation or poverty reduction.

The causal relationships are not so simple that one can say either that poverty causes biodiversity loss, or that improvements in biodiversity reduce poverty. This suggests a need to be more specific in defining what types of poverty and biodiversity issues are being assessed.